Skip to Content
Applied SciencesApplied Sciences
  • Editorial
  • Open Access

14 June 2026

6 Pages

Research on Biomechanics, Equipment Development, Motor Control and Learning of Human Movements

and
1
School of Mechanical Engineering, Northwestern Polytechnical University, Xi’an 710072, China
2
Biomechanics Lab, Faculty of Arts & Science, University of Lethbridge, Lethbridge, AB T1K 3M4, Canada
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.

1. Introduction

Human movement science has evolved from largely independent disciplinary traditions into an increasingly integrated research field. Biomechanics provides the mechanical foundation of movement analysis [1,2,3,4,5,6], and motor control and motor learning explain the neural and behavioral organization of skilled actions [7,8,9,10,11], while equipment development and wearable technologies increasingly enable the augmentation, monitoring, and optimization of human performance [12,13,14,15,16]. Recent advances in artificial intelligence (AI), wearable sensing, computational modeling, and real-time feedback systems have accelerated this convergence and expanded the translational potential of movement science across sport, ergonomics, rehabilitation, clinical, and aging applications [17,18,19,20,21,22,23].
At the same time, important challenges remain. Many complex motor behaviors still lack comprehensive biomechanical characterization [24,25,26]. Traditional ergonomic assessments often rely on static or simplified models that inadequately represent dynamic human movement [27,28]. Moreover, despite rapid technological progress, the integration of real-time biomechanical monitoring, adaptive intervention systems, and motor learning principles remains incomplete [16,29,30]. As a result, the field is increasingly shifting from descriptive analysis toward predictive, personalized, and ecologically valid approaches capable of operating in real-world environments.
This Special Issue, “Research on Biomechanics, Equipment Development, Motor Control and Learning of Human Movements”, was organized to highlight emerging advances across these interconnected domains. The published studies collectively demonstrate how contemporary movement science is evolving toward interdisciplinary integration involving biomechanics, equipment efficiency, wearable technology, AI-assisted analysis, musculoskeletal simulation, cybernetic modeling, and adaptive human-centered systems. Rather than representing isolated contributions, the articles in this Special Issue reveal broader trends shaping the future direction of human movement research.

2. Major Contributions of the Special Issue

A central contribution of this Special Issue is the advancement of movement analysis beyond static and laboratory-constrained paradigms toward dynamic, real-time, and context-sensitive approaches. Yu et al. [31] developed a novel biomechanical framework for quantifying dynamic ergonomic risks during aircraft maintenance tasks, illustrating how motion capture and computational modeling can improve the assessment of complex occupational movements beyond traditional posture-based scoring systems. Similarly, Kos et al. [32] addressed a major technological bottleneck in real-time biomechanical feedback by developing a lightweight scheduler architecture capable of supporting high-frequency wearable sensing with minimal latency. Together, these studies demonstrate the growing feasibility of closed-loop movement monitoring systems for occupational, sport and rehabilitation settings.
The Special Issue also highlights the increasing importance of personalized and application-oriented equipment evaluation. Riedl et al. [33] demonstrated that carbon plate running shoes significantly improved running economy in amateur athletes, while simultaneously revealing substantial inter-individual variability in biomechanical responses. Their findings reinforce the growing recognition that optimal equipment solutions are highly individualized rather than universally transferable. In parallel, Ebenbichler et al. [34] advanced exoskeleton evaluation by integrating musculoskeletal simulation with joint loading analysis, illustrating the importance of assessing internal biomechanical consequences beyond surface-level muscular activity alone.
Another major theme emerging from this collection is the transition toward ecologically valid and ambulatory movement analysis. Swafford et al. [35] highlighted the potential of wearable technologies for studying circus biomechanics and physiology, an area historically constrained by the practical limitations of laboratory-based measurements. Similarly, Wang et al. [36] used noncontact millimeter-wave radar and machine learning for emotion recognition in closed cabins, demonstrating how occupational research is increasingly expanding into real-world environments and previously understudied populations.
The Special Issue further contributes to the conceptual understanding of motor control and coordination. Morasso [37] synthesized multiple control paradigms into a cybernetic framework for balance regulation, emphasizing the dynamic interaction between center of mass and center of pressure control mechanisms. Collectively, these contributions reflect a broader transition from isolated biomechanical measurements toward integrated systems-level interpretations of human movement involving neural control, environmental interaction, and adaptive feedback processes [38,39,40,41].

4. Future Directions

The findings presented in this Special Issue point toward several important future research directions.
One major priority involves the development of fully integrated closed-loop systems capable of combining real-time sensing, biomechanical analysis, and adaptive intervention. Although wearable technologies and high-frequency sensing architectures have advanced substantially [35], future systems must further integrate AI-driven movement classification, fatigue prediction, motor learning principles, and personalized feedback strategies [20,52,53]. Such systems may ultimately support real-time optimization in sport performance, rehabilitation, occupational ergonomics, and assistive device control.
Another critical direction concerns ecological validity and longitudinal monitoring. Future movement research should increasingly investigate human behavior within realistic environments and over extended time periods rather than relying exclusively on short-duration laboratory assessments [31,35,54]. Advances in wearable sensing, ambient monitoring, and mobile biomechanical technologies are expected to play an essential role in this transition.
The continued development of personalized equipment and assistive technologies also represents an important frontier. The variability observed in responses to running shoes [33] and exoskeleton systems [32] highlights the need for individualized optimization approaches integrating biomechanics, computational modeling, and motor adaptation processes [6,7,8,9]. Future systems may increasingly adapt dynamically to individual users based on biomechanical and physiological feedback.
Finally, future research should continue expanding toward inclusive and diverse populations. Although this Special Issue included studies involving occupational workers, rehabilitation contexts, and unique performer groups [31,32,35,36], substantial opportunities remain for research involving clinical populations, aging individuals, individuals with disabilities, and nontraditional movement environments [21,22,23,55]. Broadening the ecological and demographic scope of movement science will be essential for improving the translational impact of the field.

5. Conclusions

The studies published in this Special Issue demonstrate that contemporary human movement science is undergoing a significant transformation driven by the convergence of biomechanics, motor control, motor learning, wearable technology, computational modeling, and AI-assisted analysis. Collectively, the contributions move the field beyond isolated descriptive measurements toward more integrated, adaptive, and ecologically valid approaches capable of addressing complex challenges in sport, rehabilitation, occupational ergonomics, and human performance.
Importantly, the Special Issue highlights not only technological advances, but also a broader conceptual shift toward a systems-level understanding of human movement. Real-time feedback architectures, wearable sensing systems, musculoskeletal simulations, cybernetic control models, and personalized equipment evaluation collectively illustrate how interdisciplinary integration is reshaping both research methodology and practical application.
We sincerely thank all authors, reviewers, and the editorial team of Applied Sciences for their valuable contributions to this Special Issue. We hope that the studies presented here will stimulate further interdisciplinary collaboration and contribute to the continued advancement of biomechanics, motor control, motor learning, and human movement science.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Hatze, H. The meaning of the term “biomechanics”. J. Biomech. 1974, 7, 189–190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  2. Hay, J. The Biomechanics of Sports Techniques, 4th ed.; Prentice-Hall: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 1993. [Google Scholar]
  3. Nigg, B.M.; Herzog, W. Biomechanics of the Musculo-Skeletal System, 2nd ed.; Chichester: New York, NY, USA, 1999. [Google Scholar]
  4. Shan, G.; Westerhoff, P. Full body kinematic characteristics of the maximal instep Soccer kick by male soccer players and parameters related to kick quality. Sports Biomech. 2005, 4, 59–72. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  5. Dugan, S.A.; Bhat, K.P. Biomechanics and analysis of running gait. Phys. Med. Rehabil. Clin. 2005, 16, 603–621. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  6. Shan, G.; Zhang, X. Soccer scoring techniques—A biomechanical re-conception of time and space for innovations in soccer research and coaching. Bioengineering 2022, 9, 333. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  7. Winter, D.A. Biomechanics and Motor Control of Human Movement; John Wiley & Sons: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2009. [Google Scholar]
  8. Magill, R.; Anderson, D.I. Motor Learning and Control; McGraw-Hill Publishing: New York, NY, USA, 2010. [Google Scholar]
  9. Schmidt, R.A.; Lee, T.D.; Winstein, C.; Wulf, G.; Zelaznik, H.N. Motor Control and Learning: A Behavioral Emphasis; Human Kinetics: Champaign, IL, USA, 2018. [Google Scholar]
  10. Rosenbaum, D.A. Human Motor Control; Academic Press: San Diego, CA, USA, 2009. [Google Scholar]
  11. Kimura, A.; Yokozawa, T.; Ozaki, H. Clarifying the biomechanical concept of coordination through comparison with coordination in motor control. Front. Sports Act. Living 2021, 3, 753062. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  12. Shan, G. Exploring the intersection of equipment design and human physical ability: Leveraging biomechanics, ergonomics/anthropometry, and wearable technology for enhancing human physical performance. Adv. Des. Res. 2023, 1, 7–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  13. Moeller, T.; Beyerlein, M.; Herzog, M.; Barisch-Fritz, B.; Marquardt, C.; Dežman, M.; Mombaur, K.; Asfour, T.; Woll, A.; Stein, T. Human motor performance assessment with lower limb exoskeletons as a potential strategy to support healthy aging—A perspective article. Prog. Biomed. Eng. 2025, 7, 013001. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  14. Stefanyshyn, D.J.; Wannop, J.W. Biomechanics research and sport equipment development. Sports Eng. 2015, 18, 191–202. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  15. Nolan, L. Carbon fibre prostheses and running in amputees: A review. Foot Ankle Surg. 2008, 14, 125–129. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  16. Zhang, X.; Shan, G.; Wang, Y.; Wan, B.; Li, H. Wearables, biomechanical feedback, and human motor-skills’ learning & optimization. Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 226. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  17. Massardi, S.; Rodriguez-Cianca, D.; Pinto-Fernandez, D.; Moreno, J.C.; Lancini, M.; Torricelli, D. Characterization and evaluation of human–exoskeleton interaction dynamics: A review. Sensors 2022, 22, 3993. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  18. Pinto-Fernandez, D.; Torricelli, D.; del Carmen Sanchez-Villamanan, M.; Aller, F.; Mombaur, K.; Conti, R.; Vitiello, N.; Moreno, J.C.; Pons, J.L. Performance evaluation of lower limb exoskeletons: A systematic review. IEEE Trans. Neural Syst. Rehabil. Eng. 2020, 28, 1573–1583. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  19. Halilaj, E.; Rajagopal, A.; Fiterau, M.; Hicks, J.L.; Hastie, T.J.; Delp, S.L. Machine learning in human movement biomechanics: Best practices, common pitfalls, and new opportunities. J. Biomech. 2018, 81, 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  20. Wang, Y.; Shan, G.; Li, H.; Wang, L. A Wearable-Sensor System with AI Technology for Real-Time Biomechanical Feedback Training in Hammer Throw. Sensors 2022, 23, 425. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  21. Çakit, E.; Karwowski, W. Applications of machine learning in human factors and ergonomics: A comprehensive review of research from the past decade. IEEE Access 2025, 13, 115263–115288. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  22. Abdelmohsen, A.M. Artificial Intelligence in Biomechanics: A Narrative Review of Current Applications in Diagnostic and Physical Rehabilitation. Physiother. Res. Int. 2025, 30, e70120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  23. Momin, M.S.; Sufian, A.; Barman, D.; Dutta, P.; Dong, M.; Leo, M. In-home older adults’ activity pattern monitoring using depth sensors: A review. Sensors 2022, 22, 9067. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  24. Shan, G.; Visentin, P.; Zhang, X.; Hao, W.; Yu, D. Bicycle kick in soccer: Is the virtuosity systematically entrainable? Sci. Bull. 2015, 60, 819–821. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  25. Molavian, R.; Fatahi, A.; Abbasi, H.; Khezri, D. Artificial intelligence approach in biomechanics of gait and sport: A systematic literature review. J. Biomed. Phys. Eng. 2023, 13, 383. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  26. Tytell, E.; Holmes, P.; Cohen, A.H. Spikes alone do not behavior make: Why neuroscience needs biomechanics. Curr. Opin. Neurobiol. 2011, 21, 816–822. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  27. Joshi, M.; Deshpande, V. A systematic review of comparative studies on ergonomic assessment techniques. Int. J. Ind. Ergon. 2019, 74, 102865. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  28. Stirling, L.; Kelty-Stephen, D.; Fineman, R.; Jones, M.L.; Daniel Park, B.-K.; Reed, M.P.; Parham, J.; Choi, H.J. Static, dynamic, and cognitive fit of exosystems for the human operator. Hum. Factors 2020, 62, 424–440. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  29. Wolpert, D.M. The organization of multiple motor memories. Curr. Opin. Neurobiol. 2026, 99, 103213. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  30. Murakami, H. Toward a Probabilistic Framework of Human Motor Control: Integrating Variability, Entropy, and Complex Systems Principles. Complexities 2026, 2, 9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  31. Yu, M.; Zhao, D.; Zhang, Y.; Chen, J.; Shan, G.; Cao, Y.; Ye, J. Development of a Novel Biomechanical Framework for Quantifying Dynamic Risks in Motor Behaviors During Aircraft Maintenance. Appl. Sci. 2025, 15, 5390. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  32. Kos, A.; Bűrmen, Á.; Hribernik, M.; Tomažič, S.; Umek, A.; Fajfar, I.; Puhan, J. Lightweight periodic scheduler in wearable devices for real-time biofeedback systems in sports and physical rehabilitation. Appl. Sci. 2025, 15, 6405. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  33. Riedl, M.; von Diecken, C.; Ueberschär, O. One shoe to fit them all? Effect of various carbon plate running shoes on running economy in male and female amateur triathletes and runners at individual training and race Paces. Appl. Sci. 2024, 14, 11535. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  34. Ebenbichler, M.; Reimeir, B.; Scherb, D.; Eberle, R.; Weidner, R. Loading of the Glenohumeral Joint: Biomechanical Evaluation Tools for Shoulder-Supporting Exoskeletons. Appl. Sci. 2026, 16, 2661. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  35. Swafford, A.P.; Hollister, N.; McDonald, S.; Mercer, J.A. Advancing circus biomechanics and physiology research with wearable technology: Challenges and recommendations. Appl. Sci. 2025, 15, 3981. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  36. Wang, H.; Chen, D.; Gu, S.; Zhou, Y.; Xiao, J.; Sun, Y.; Sun, J.; Huang, Y.; Zhang, X.; Fan, H. Emotion Recognition in a Closed-Cabin Environment: An Exploratory Study Using Millimeter-Wave Radar and Respiration Signals. Appl. Sci. 2024, 14, 10561. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  37. Morasso, P. Cybernetics of Balance Control. Appl. Sci. 2026, 16, 4873. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  38. Nishikawa, K.; Biewener, A.A.; Aerts, P.; Ahn, A.N.; Chiel, H.J.; Daley, M.A.; Daniel, T.L.; Full, R.J.; Hale, M.E.; Hedrick, T.L. Neuromechanics: An integrative approach for understanding motor control. Integr. Comp. Biol. 2007, 47, 16–54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  39. Djebbara, Z.; Jensen, O.B.; Parada, F.J.; Gramann, K. Neuroscience and architecture: Modulating behavior through sensorimotor responses to the built environment. Neurosci. Biobehav. Rev. 2022, 138, 104715. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  40. Parziale, A.; Marcelli, A. Understanding upper-limb movements via neurocomputational models of the sensorimotor system and neurorobotics: Where we stand. Artif. Intell. Rev. 2024, 57, 73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  41. Senden, M.; Peters, J.; Röhrbein, F.; Deco, G.; Goebel, R. The embodied brain: Computational mechanisms of integrated sensorimotor interactions with a dynamic environment. Front. Comput. Neurosci. 2020, 14, 53. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  42. Newell, K.M.; Vaillancourt, D.E. Dimensional change in motor learning. Hum. Mov. Sci. 2001, 20, 695–715. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  43. Leng, Y.; Sun, R. Multifunctional biomedical devices with closed-loop systems for precision therapy. Adv. Healthc. Mater. 2025, 14, 2500860. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  44. Chang, S.T.; Evans, J.; Crowe, S.; Zhang, X.; Shan, G. An innovative approach for Real Time Determination of Power and Reaction Time in a Martial Arts Quasi-Training Environment Using 3D Motion Capture and EMG Measurements. Arch. Budo 2011, 7, 185–196. [Google Scholar]
  45. Harari, G.M.; Gosling, S.D. Understanding behaviours in context using mobile sensing. Nat. Rev. Psychol. 2023, 2, 767–779. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  46. McDevitt, S.; Hernandez, H.; Hicks, J.; Lowell, R.; Bentahaikt, H.; Burch, R.; Ball, J.; Chander, H.; Freeman, C.; Taylor, C. Wearables for biomechanical performance optimization and risk assessment in industrial and sports applications. Bioengineering 2022, 9, 33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  47. Chan, R.W.; Abrahamse, E.; Blischke, K.; Bongers, R.M.; Boutin, A.; Hummel, F.C.; Immink, M.A.; Kornysheva, K.; van der Lubbe, R.H.; Maceira, P. Diversity, Individualization, and Enhancement in Motor Learning: Current Challenges and Future Directions From the First Theoretical and Applied Advances in Motor Learning Conference. J. Mot. Learn. Dev. 2025, 14, 1–5. [Google Scholar]
  48. Lopez-Fernandez, M.; Sabido, R.; Caballero, C.; Moreno, F.J. Relationship between initial motor variability and learning and adaptive ability. A systematic review. Neuroscience 2025, 565, 301–311. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  49. Jahanian-Najafabadi, A.; Davoodi, E. Oscillatory dynamics of motor learning across adulthood life span: A systematic review. Front. Aging Neurosci. 2025, 17, 1646172. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  50. Fernandes, V.; Mendonça, É.; Palma, M.L.; Nogueira, M.; Godina, R.; Gabriel, A.T. Ergonomics and machine learning: Wearable sensors in the prevention of work-related musculoskeletal disorders. In Occupational and Environmental Safety and Health IV; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2022; pp. 199–210. [Google Scholar]
  51. Swain, T.A.; McNarry, M.A.; Runacres, A.W.; Mackintosh, K.A. The role of multi-sensor measurement in the assessment of movement quality: A systematic review. Sports Med. 2023, 53, 2477–2504. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  52. Ohueri, C.C.; Seghier, T.E.; Jing, K.T.; Esa, M. AI-powered adaptive exoskeletons for long-term musculoskeletal disorder prevention in dynamic construction environments. Adv. Eng. Inform. 2026, 69, 104042. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  53. Hakkak Moghadam Torbati, A.; Shiravand, Y.; Mazinani, A. Learning Nonlinear Motor Control: How Integrating Machine Learning and Nonlinear Dynamics Reveals Structure, Adaptation, and Control in Human Movement. Actuators 2026, 15, 166. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  54. Joung, J.; Kim, J.; Kim, D. Towards out-of-studio motion capture through wearable sensors. J. Ind. Eng. Chem. 2025, 155, 248–278. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  55. Derakhshan, P.; Miller, W.C.; Bundon, A.; Labbé, D.; Bolt, T.; Mortenson, W.B. Adaptive outdoor physical activities for adults with mobility disability: A scoping review. Front. Rehabil. Sci. 2024, 4, 1331971. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Article Metrics

Citations

Article Access Statistics

Multiple requests from the same IP address are counted as one view.