Skip to main content

Artificial intelligence and gymnastics scoring - your opinions please

The Guardian yesterday has an interesting article about the FIG's plans to introduce computer judging to gymnastics.  I suggest you give it a read.

It won't surprise you to know that I have lots of things to say about this; I think that AI can contribute something to scoring, but not to judgement.  If the implementation of this initiative is not managed with common sense and imagination, we could find ourselves with a sport that is even more devoid of artistry and the aesthetic.  

In response to a comment asking for evidence of biased judging, especially in favour of the USA, I commented as follows.  Would be interested in hearing your opinions.  

'There is plenty [evidence of bias]. But the judging can be unreliable in all sorts of different directions, not just for the USA.

The problem arises at Code level, when the grading of moves and the bonus points are determined. Every country has a say in this, but naturally those countries with the strongest political representation in the sport will have the strongest influence. It is something that builds up over the years. So for example in WAG we currently have a Code that on floor and vault emphasises powerful acrobatics to the extent that the aesthetic has gone AWOL on floor in all but a few exceptional cases.

Vaulting requirements have changed and are so physically demanding that very few gymnasts in the world can prepare two competitive vaults at international level - e.g. in Europe in 2013 only 13 gymnasts attempted to qualify for the vault final of eight gymnasts out of a field of several hundred gymnasts.

At world level the USA leads in vaulting and acrobatics and there is a significant gap between the leading Americans and the rest of the world. When combined with what could be considered biased judging - a natural human tendency to overlook errors in those considered to have an almost mystical command of the sport - this adds up to an advantage [which might be considered a bias]. For example, Simone Biles' highly acrobatic work is astonishing in its accuracy and has extremely high difficulty scores, yet the judges seem to ignore failures in the aesthetic quality of her work. Gradually her scores on bars and beam have crept up as belief in her strengths elsewhere make it uncomfortable for the judges to deduct. The 'wow' factor blinds judges and fans to the less than perfect state of artistic presentation in some of Biles' work while others with more grace and less athleticism struggle to find the same certainty and confidence in the judges' evaluations of their work. These are minor, often and usually tiny granules of distinction that build up in one gymnast's and one style's favour over another. They in turn affect the shape of the sport as it progresses and the Code develops, and in performance affect the psychology of the gymnast and the reliability of competition.

A computer system that relies on measurement and quantification of movements will only emphasise these distinctions and detract from the aesthetic side, unless its implementation is carefully managed to allow for the judges' panel to pay more attention to the impression of the whole routine. There would have to be a splitting of the scores to introduce a technical mark (computer) and an artistic score (judges). As far as I can read, the FIG hasn't yet considered this, so unless the target of 2020 is purely a pilot run, they are getting ahead of themselves on every apparatus except vault. If the pilot is on vault only, as this article seems to suggest, then that could be a good thing as vaulting is a single skill and the measurement and judging process already seems to be highly technical and well elaborated.

The role of President of the FIG is at face value a mouthpiece job, yet for decades this mouthpiece has influenced the direction of the sport disproportionately and favour has been cast on his (no female President ever!) national programme. Titov during the Soviet dominated era saw the language of gymnastics favouring aesthetic, innovative gymnastics, Grandi presided over a period of growth for Italian WAG gymnastics [with the introduction of the additive score leading to the only Italian AA World Champion, with a fall], and now Watanabe introduces a technological step forward that is of potential benefit to the Japanese economy, while the JPN gymnastics programme continues to lead MAG and to grow WAG.

Introducing computer judging will only emphasise the growing tendency in both MAG and WAG to favour content over quality unless the FIG considers the whole picture and implements gradually with review of the gymnastics routines favoured [in addition to the calculation of D scores and deductions for faulty execution] and their likely influence on the direction of the sport.'

Comments

  1. We have been using AI in training for a number of years now (wrist/ankle/toe/hip sensors) and similar technology is used in other sports (Hawkeye in tennis is an obvious example but fencing, boxing and other sports use their own forms of this technology). I have no problem with AI judging provided the technology used is made available at all levels so all gymnasts and judges can learn with it and it promotes a level playing field and balanced judging. In fact, compulsories were largely designed to provide just that. They were just a small sample of all possible routines which showed how well a gymnast had learned those particular technical requirements.

    To me, gymnastics has far bigger problems than judging. WADA (and thus, political influence), 40-60% injury lists and nation-swapping are far more damaging to the identity of gymnastics than judging (biased or not). We would do well to remember the discussions of 90's when dropping gymnastics from the Olympics was seriously being considered and why that was

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That's interesting Dave. Do you know if the new system will be compatible with your metrics?

      Delete
    2. We built the system at our local gym ourselves from existing software used in cricket to help with bowling actions. It's used by the gymnasts themselves to judge their body-forms during skills, splits, leaps, twists etc and we can go through the video with them if needed. This frees up our time as trainers. It could feasibly be used for judging but we do not run competitions there

      FIG and the IOC are not exactly keen to have judging transparency and I doubt they will make this system open for criticism or cross-compatible with any existing system. I believe it will be completely hidden with only the scores announced.

      One thing which bothers me. It will be a marketing goldmine if gyms around the world are forced to buy into this system and Fuji will be keen to keep the technology and software patents

      Delete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

‘We all love her very much’ - Roschina speaks of Mustafina and the need to perfect an Amanar vault

From sport.ru via vk.com.  Google translate  A big interview with Anastasia Loginova from Sport24 with Lyudmila Roshchina following the Strongest Cup, where the gymnast won four out of five gold medals. We quote several fragments, the full version is available on the publication's website, link at the end. ❓ The Strongest Athletes Cup has recently ended. Did you have time to analyze your performances? 💬 I just rewatched the broadcast, looked at my shortcomings. ❓ Did you set a medal plan for this start? 💬 I didn't think about it. Only that I needed to do my program - and then what will happen. ❓ Did you have time to discuss the competition with your coach? 💬 She praised me, said that I was great. She didn't scold me for mistakes on the beam - on the contrary, she supported me. ❓ Can we say that the beam is your weak spot? This is the only final you didn't get to. 💬 Probably yes. I have this apparatus that is a bit unpolished, so to speak. Treacherous. I need to work...

Tatyana Nabiyeva on work and love in China

Some highlights from a long interview with 2010 World champion Tatyana Nabiyeva.  Source: Russian team page on VK.com.  Translation - Google translate A big interview with Tatyana Nabieva about the peculiarities of work and life in China, the bright years of her sports career, a little about modern gymnastics and about love. On the Nabiyeva flight — At the same championship, you presented a new element on the bars, which was later added to the rules with your last name (flying over the top bar with a straight body, difficulty group F. — Sport24). How did you come up with the idea to try something new? — Actually, it happened spontaneously, I think. We worked with Vera Iosifovna [Kiryashova] on the purity of the elements on the bars, sometimes I didn’t fly all the way to the Shaposhnikova element. Once I didn’t fly all the way to the bars either and stood on my feet between the bars, bending my legs in flight for safety. Then Vera Iosifovna said that this was a different eleme...

Angelina Melnikova photo session

Daria Isaeva has done a photo session with Angelina Melnikova at Dynamo Moscow.  Here are Angelina’s words about it.   "  The first time I was on a balance beam I was six years old. I was scared because of the height, so at first I walked hand in hand with my trainer." "The hardest thing on this apparatus is to keep your balance. Usually, when I'm on the beam, I imagine that I'm in a corridor 10 centimeters wide." "You can't be afraid of the beam! Coaches say that if you have fear, you will perform poorly." "The first difficult element I did at the age of eight was a backflip. In adult gymnastics, this element is considered one of the easiest." “I still can’t do a cartwheel on a log; I can easily fall off it, although children can do this element at the age of six.” "It's better to perform on the balance beam barefoot - you feel the apparatus better that way. But to avoid injuries, we sometimes tape our ankles." "It...