| Literature DB >> 35875735 |
Chao Zhang1, Fang Tu2.
Abstract
In recent years, China's competitive sports have developed rapidly. Among them, football is a sport with high energy consumption, high intensity, strong antagonism, and high speed. As a result, injuries are common in football practice. It is impossible to do adequate football training in order to avoid such incidents. At the moment, football injury incidents are common, severely limiting the full growth of the sport in China. This work investigates the safety management of football training using machine learning and an information coverage-centralized genetic technique. To begin, this article describes in detail the machine learning and information coverage-centralized genetic algorithm, summarizes the classification of machine learning models, and introduces the verification and evaluation process of machine learning models and trusted information coverage models as an important theoretical basis for football training safety management. Then, the genetic algorithm based on information coverage concentration is used in football training to analyze the safety risk of football training and the analysis of training speed type. The results show that the human factor accounts for the highest proportion in football training safety accidents, accounting for 28.75%. In the analysis of football training speed, the average passing time of medium strength accounts for the highest proportion of 39.75%. In football training, in order to ensure the safety of training, the combination of medium strength and high strength can be adopted to avoid training injury.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35875735 PMCID: PMC9303085 DOI: 10.1155/2022/2432309
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Comput Intell Neurosci
Figure 1Basic process of machine learning model.
Figure 2K-nearest neighbor classification graph.
Figure 3Multilayer perception map.
Stadium safety inspection results (N = 73).
| Inspect | Not checked | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Number (PCS) | Percentage (%) | Number (PCS) | Percentage (%) | |
| Is there any toxic substance | 6 | 6.86 | 69 | 93.24 |
| Are there grooves or depressions | 32 | 45.12 | 41 | 55.16 |
| Whether there is garbage on the surface | 46 | 61.65 | 27 | 38.24 |
| Are stones stacked on the court | 39 | 52.13 | 34 | 47.96 |
| Are there any obvious wires on the court | 21 | 27.5 | 54 | 72.83 |
| Is the site wet | 18 | 25.94 | 55 | 74.02 |
| Is the site dry | 14 | 17.85 | 61 | 82.97 |
| Is it safe near the stadium | 29 | 39.16 | 46 | 62.05 |
Result table for safety precautions check of goal set (N = 73).
| Inspect | Not checked | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Number (PCS) | Percentage (%) | Number (PCS) | Percentage (%) | |
| Firmness of goal assembly | 6 | 8.23 | 68 | 91.82 |
| Is the goal completely fixed on the ground | 5 | 5.52 | 70 | 95.26 |
Training safety facility prevention questionnaire (N = 73).
| Inspect | Not checked | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Number (PCS) | Percentage (%) | Number (PCS) | Percentage (%) | |
| Do the shoes fit | 26 | 36.13 | 46 | 64.42% |
| Are foot guards worn | 24 | 32.64 | 51 | 68.56 |
Figure 4Schematic diagram of football injury types.
Types of injury accidents in football training.
| Accident type code | Accident type |
|---|---|
| A-1 | Accidents caused by students during football training |
| A-2 | Accidents caused by coaches during football training |
| A-3 | Accidents caused by coaches and others other than students |
| B-1 | Accidents caused by equipment, site, and other factors |
| B-2 | Accidents caused by sports environment |
| C-1 | Accidents caused by safety management factors |
| C-2 | Accidents caused by management training materials |
Figure 5Line chart of cumulative percentage of football training risk.
Figure 6Proportion of time for different passing strength exercises.
Running speed training time ratio.
| Run fast (%) | Medium speedrunning (%) | Slow running (%) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mean value | 36.24 | 40.35 | 23.41 |