What do open papers measure for monocular and few-camera markerless capture against reference systems, what is the evidence for commercial tools such as Move AI, and what does it imply for animation production use?
Open results are research-method numbers, not commercial-tool numbers: on Human3.6M (marker-based) a monocular lifting model reports 46.8 mm MPJPE from detected 2D keypoints (37.2 mm from ground-truth 2D); on in-the-wild 3DPW WHAM reports 57.8 mm; on EMDB global trajectories WHAM reports 354.8 mm W-MPJPE100, 6.0 % root-translation error and 4.4 mm foot sliding. A 2022 clinical review gives 40-60 mm joint-centre differences and up to 30 degree ankle-angle differences for monocular methods, and OpenCap (two or more phones) reports 4.5 degree joint-angle MAE against skin-marker capture, with the authors noting that skin-marker error itself limits what can be shown. No open independent validation of Move AI or Flow Studio mocap against marker-based ground truth was found (bounded Europe PMC search), and Move's own accuracy page gives no numbers. Implication (synthesis): treat markerless output as animation reference or blocking requiring cleanup of root drift and foot contact, not as ma...
Structured fields
{
"citations": [
{
"url": "https://arxiv.org/pdf/1811.11742v2",
"note": "candidate evidence excerpts"
},
{
"url": "https://arxiv.org/pdf/2312.07531v2",
"note": "candidate evidence excerpts"
},
{
"url": "https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8884063/",
"note": "candidate evidence excerpts"
},
{
"url": "https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10586693/",
"note": "candidate evidence excerpts"
},
{
"url": "https://move.ai/accuracy",
"note": "candidate evidence excerpts"
},
{
"url": "https://www.ebi.ac.uk/europepmc/webservices/rest/search?query=%22Move%20AI%22%20markerless&format=json&pageSize=10&resultType=lite",
"note": "candidate evidence excerpts"
},
{
"url": "https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC13511503/",
"note": "candidate evidence excerpts"
}
]
}Evidence claims
- [sourced_fact] Open results are research-method numbers, not commercial-tool numbers: on Human3.6M (marker-based) a monocular lifting model reports 46.8 mm MPJPE from detected 2D keypoints (37.2 mm from ground-truth 2D); on in-the-wild 3DPW WHAM reports 57.8 mm; on EMDB global trajectories WHAM reports 354.8 mm W-MPJPE100, 6.0 % root-translation error and 4.4 mm foot sliding. A 2022 clinical review gives 40-60 mm joint-centre differences and up to 30 degree ankle-angle differences for monocular methods, and OpenCap (two or more phones) reports 4.5 degree joint-angle MAE against skin-marker capture, with the authors noting that skin-marker error itself limits what can be shown. No open independent validation of Move AI or Flow Studio mocap against marker-based ground truth was found (bounded Europe PMC search), and Move's own accuracy page gives no numbers. Implication (synthesis): treat markerless output as animation reference or blocking requiring cleanup of root drift and foot contact, not as marker-equivalent data. · locator: candidate evidence excerpts source
Rights
| component | license | hosting | redistribution | modification | training | Evidence and notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| documentation | unknown | permitted | permitted | unknown | unknown | Applies to this original summary only, not to the cited sources. |
Linked records
- cites → https://arxiv.org/pdf/1811.11742v2
- cites → https://arxiv.org/pdf/2312.07531v2
- cites → https://move.ai/accuracy
- cites → https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10586693
- cites → https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC13511503
- cites → https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8884063
- cites → https://www.ebi.ac.uk/europepmc/webservices/rest/search?format=json&pageSize=10&query=%22Move+AI%22+markerless&resultType=lite