# Design and Validation of Rule-Based Expert System by Using Kinect V2 for Real-Time Athlete Support
## 3 Results and Discussion
### The Effect of the System on Physical and Cognitive Development
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline  & & & & & & & & & & & \\ \cline{3-11}  & & & **1** & **2** & **3** & **4** & **5** & **6** & **7** & **8** & **9** & **10** \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{**Improvement**} & \multirow{4}{*}{**DSP**} & **GJL\%** & 47.25 & 45.29 & 53.49 & 66.15 & 78.84 & 66.20 & 53.04 & 49.47 & 46.96 & 59.10 \\  & & **GJR\%** & 48.24 & 36.78 & 63.22 & 54.80 & 45.58 & 75.54 & 51.84 & 64.14 & 37.61 & 51.87 \\  & & **S\%** & 74.12 & 18.59 & 53.34 & 51.34 & 63.75 & 72.60 & 58.20 & 59.65 & 54.15 & 43.99 \\ \cline{2-11}
**Training Type** & \multirow{4}{*}{**LR**} & **GJL\%** & 50.08 & 38.15 & 60.47 & 65.21 & 46.12 & 75.81 & 67.91 & 62.32 & 59.36 & 43.06 \\  & & **GJR\%** & 43.19 & 43.59 & 63.65 & 67.01 & 47.76 & 80.30 & 54.25 & 53.42 & 58.32 & 58.10 \\  & & **S\%** & 57.95 & 38.51 & 61.63 & 59.02 & 52.08 & 81.10 & 71.58 & 57.96 & 57.41 & 66.96 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 8: Improvement Rates Achieved at the End of System Usage Process. GJL% means glenohumeral left joint % improvement; GJR% means glenohumeral right joint % improvement; 5% means spine % improvement. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Pairs No. **} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Pair Groups**} & \multicolumn{6}{c}{**Paired Differences**} \\  & & & & & **95\% Confidence Interval** & **t** & **df** & **Sig. (2-Tailed)** & **Effect Size (d)** \\  & & **Mean** & **Std. Dev** & **Std. Err. ** & & & & & & & \\  & & & & & & & & & & & & \\  & & **Mean** & **Std. Dev** & **Std. Err. ** & & & & & & & & \\  & & **Mean** & **Mean** & **Lower** & **Upper** & & & & & & \\ \hline Pair 1 & DSP. GJL1-DSP.GL2 & 0.82100 & 0.58936 & 0.18637 & 0.39940 & 1.24260 & 4.405 & 9 & 0.002 & 0.328 \\ Pair 2 & DSP. GJL1-DSP.GL3 & 1.99400 & 1.04455 & 0.33032 & 1.46477 & 2.74123 & 6.037 & 9 & 0.000 & 0.884 \\ Pair 3 & DSP. GJL1-DSP.GL4 & 2.93600 & 1.23701 & 0.39118 & 2.05110 & 3.82090 & 7.506 & 9 & 0.000 & 1.351 \\ Pair 4 & DSP. GJR1-DSP.GL2 & 1.06900 & 1.14143 & 0.36095 & 0.25247 & 1.88553 & 2.962 & 9 & 0.016 & 0.383 \\ Pair 5 & DSP. GJR1-DSP.GR3 & 2.17307 & 1.66957 & 0.553624 & 0.95994 & 3.38060 & 4.052 & 9 & 0.003 & 0.814 \\ Pair 6 & DSP. GJR1-DSP.GR4 & 2.85100 & 1.85241 & 0.58578 & 1.52586 & 4.17614 & 4.867 & 9 & 0.001 & 1.093 \\ Pair 7 & DSP. SJL5-DSP.S2 & 0.78800 & 0.57596 & 0.18205 & 0.37618 & 1.19982 & 4.3  
When these values were analyzed for DSP movement, \(p\) values of the glenohumeral left joint, spine, and glenohumeral right joint indicate a significant change in cognitive abilities before and after the process (\(p<0.05\)). The same situation is observed in the \(p\) values of LR movement, indicating a significant change in cognitive abilities before and after the process. Moreover, these results are supported by the d values shown in pair 3, pair 6, pair 9, pair 12, pair 15, and pair 18 of Table 9 as in [42, 56]. These situations in Tables 9 and 10 are an indication that in addition to making the movements more stable, the use of the system makes training more accurate, so physical and cognitive abilities related to the movements are increased as stated in [93, 94, 95].