## 2 Approach and Implementation  
The development of a framework for fusing wearables and other data sources requires an intimate knowledge of the application area needs, thus listening to the demand pull rather than pushing particular technologies at a predetermined solution was critical. We adopted a user centric needs analysis [14] approach where the current and future needs of typical deployment scenarios were considered from existing research and consultancy relationships. From this, their test sites for deployment and their data needs were considered (Table 1).  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l l l l} \hline \hline
**Site 1: Wearable Technology Enterprise** & & & \\ \hline
**Data Source** & **Description** & **Sample Bandwidth** & **Interpretation** \\ \hline Inertial sensor (SABEL Sense) & 9 DoF inertial sensors & 9 \(\times\) (25–250 Hz & Extensive data processing \\ \hline
3D Motion Capture (Vicon, Oxford, UK) [15]\({}^{*}\) & 20 markers & 20 \(\times\) 50 Hz & Conversion from gait model to frame of reference data \\ \hline
2D Video Data (Parasonic HC-VT59M) [15]\({}^{*}\) & 50 Hz HD video & 45 Mbps & For visual comparison \\ \hline
**Site 2: Sports Teaching and Research Lab** & & & \\ \hline Inertial sensor (SABEL Sense) [9]\({}^{*}\) & 4 \(\times\) 9 DoF inertial sensors & 36 \(\times\) 100 Hz & Data processing for swimming analysis \\ \hline
2D Video data (GoPro San Mateo, CA, USA) [9]\({}^{*}\) & 25 Hz HD underwater video & 12 Mbps & Visual comparison for temporal kinematic measures \\ \hline Inertial sensor (SABEL Sense) [16]\({}^{*}\) & 8 \(\times\) 9 DoF inertial sensors & 72 \(\times\) 100 Hz & Data processing for vertebra analysis \\ \hline
3D Motion Capture (Optitrack, Corvallis, OR, USA) [16]\({}^{*}\) & 6\(\times\) markers & 6 \(\times\) 100 Hz & Marker positional change for frame of reference data \\ \hline
2D Video Data (Parasonic HC-VT59M) [16]\({}^{*}\) & 25 Hz HD video & 12 Mbps & Visual comparison \\ \hline Inertial Sensor (SABEL Sense) [17]\({}^{*}\) & 1 \(\times\) 9 DoF inertial sensors & 9 \(\times\) 100 Hz & Data processing for gait analysis \\ \hline
3D Motion Capture (Vicon) [17]\({}^{*}\) & [PERSON] marker model & 19 \(\times\) 100 Hz & Conversion from lower body model to frame of reference data \\ \hline
2 Plate Force Platform (Bertec, Fairfax, VA, USA) [17]\({}^{*}\) & 8 \(\times\) 3 DoF piezoelectric load cells & 8 \(\times\) 100 Hz–500 Hz & Orthogonal force production data \\ \hline
**Site 3: National Sports Institute [18]** & & & \\ \hline Force Platform under Athletics Track (Tec Ghan, Kyoto, Japan) & & & \\ \hline
3D Motion Capture (Motion Analysis Co, Santa Rosa, CA, USA) & 16 infrared cameras & 3 \(\times\) 16 markers \(\times\) 200 Hz & Calculation from 3d data to distance, velocity, angle, acceleration, COM, etc. \\ \hline Object Tracking System (ChyronHego Co, New York, NY, USA) & Wireless object tracking system & 30 players \(\times\) 11 items \(\times\) 20 Hz & To measure speed, distance, HR, trajectory, heading direction \\ \hline Force Platform for Baseball Mount and Battery’s Box (Tec Ghan) & 13 \(\times\) 6-axis force plates & 13 \(\times\) 6 \(\times\) 1–5 kHz & To analyse reaction force, movement of COP time differences between players \\ \hline High Speed Cameras (NAC Image Technology, Tokyo, Japan) & 500 Hz HD video & 1920 \(\times\) 1080 pixels \(\times\) 500 Hz & For visual analysis and confirmation \\ \hline \multicolumn{4}{l}{\({}^{*}\)Cited research.} \\ \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 1: Sample deployment sites.