Skip to content

PostΒ #8

@ANaaim

Description

@ANaaim

🌐 How should we standardize data organization in markerless motion capture? πŸ“Š

In markerless motion capture, effective data organization is crucial for ensuring data is shareable, comparable, and easy to process. But how should this be done?

πŸ‘‰ The Big Question:
Should we aim for a broad standardization for all markerless setups? Or should we focus on specific use cases, like comparing different methods?

We believe that two elements are critical for standardization:
1️⃣ File Types: Defining which formats (e.g., .avi, .hdf5, .toml) should be used for each data type.
2️⃣ Metadata Requirements: Establishing a minimal set of metadata for each dataset.
3️⃣ Data Structure: Determining how data should be organized across folders for flexibility and scalability.

πŸ“ Proposed Structures:

By Data Type: Each folder can be processed independently, making it easier to share specific datasets.

By Trial: A complete trial with all associated data in one folder, representing the real-world acquisition process.

πŸ’‘ We want your input! How would you organize data for markerless motion capture?

Would you prefer a general standard for all setups or separate standards for specific purposes?

What are the most critical metadata fields you would include?

Do you prefer a structure by data type or by trial?

Share your thoughts below! πŸ’¬ Let’s discuss and collectively design a robust data standard for the community. #Biomechanics #MarkerlessMotionCapture #DataOrganization

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    No labels
    No labels

    Projects

    No projects

    Milestone

    No milestone

    Relationships

    None yet

    Development

    No branches or pull requests

    Issue actions