Author: Athlytics Package
Date: 2026-05-28

# Advanced Features: EWMA, Quality Control, and Cohort Analysis

#### Athlytics Package

#### 2026-05-28

# Introduction

This vignette demonstrates the advanced features of Athlytics for sports physiology analysis:

1. Data Quality Control: Detecting and flagging HR/power spikes, GPS drift
2. ACWR with EWMA: Exponentially weighted moving average with confidence bands
3. Cohort Reference Analysis: Multi-athlete percentile comparisons

These features make Athlytics suitable for both individual training analysis and multi-athlete research studies.

# 1. Data Quality Control

Before calculating physiological metrics, it’s crucial to ensure data quality. The `flag_quality()` function detects common issues in activity stream data.

## Basic Quality Checking

    library(Athlytics)
    library(dplyr)

    # Parse stream data from a FIT/TCX/GPX file
    stream_data <- parse_activity_file("path/to/activity.fit")

    # Flag quality issues
    flagged_data <- flag_quality(
      stream_data,
      sport = "Run",
      hr_range = c(30, 220), # Valid HR range
      pw_range = c(0, 1500), # Valid power range
      max_run_speed = 7.0, # Max speed (m/s) ≈ 2:23/km pace
      max_hr_jump = 10, # Max HR change per second
      max_pw_jump = 300, # Max power change per second
      min_steady_minutes = 20, # Min duration for steady-state
      steady_cv_threshold = 0.08 # CV fraction (0-1) threshold for steady-state
    )

    # View quality summary
    summary_stats <- summarize_quality(flagged_data)
    print(summary_stats)

Output interpretation: - `quality_score`: Overall quality (0-1), where 1 = perfect - `flagged_pct`: Percentage of data points with issues - `steady_state_pct`: Percentage suitable for EF/decoupling calculations

## Why Quality Control Matters

Without quality control: - HR spikes from sensor errors inflate HRSS calculations - GPS drift creates artificially high speeds, affecting pace metrics - Non-steady-state segments contaminate Efficiency Factor (EF) calculations

With quality control: - Only clean data contributes to metrics - Steady-state detection ensures valid EF/decoupling calculations - Researchers can report data quality in publications

# 2. ACWR with EWMA Method

Traditional ACWR uses rolling averages (RA). The EWMA method, introduced by Williams et al. (2017), offers: - Greater sensitivity to recent training changes - Customizable decay rates via half-life parameters - Confidence bands via bootstrap to quantify uncertainty

> Reference: Williams, S., et al. (2017). Better way to determine the acute:chronic workload ratio? British Journal of Sports Medicine, 51(3), 209-210. DOI: 10.1136/bjsports-2016-096589

## Comparing RA vs EWMA

    # Load activities
    activities <- load_local_activities("export_12345678.zip")

    # Calculate ACWR using Rolling Average (traditional)
    acwr_ra <- calculate_acwr_ewma(
      activities,
      activity_type = "Run",
      method = "ra",
      acute_period = 7,
      chronic_period = 28,
      load_metric = "duration_mins"
    )

    # Calculate ACWR using EWMA
    acwr_ewma <- calculate_acwr_ewma(
      activities,
      activity_type = "Run",
      method = "ewma",
      half_life_acute = 3.5, # Acute load half-life (days)
      half_life_chronic = 14, # Chronic load half-life (days)
      load_metric = "duration_mins"
    )

    # Compare the two methods
    library(ggplot2)
    ggplot() +
      geom_line(
        data = acwr_ra, aes(x = date, y = acwr_smooth),
        color = "blue", linewidth = 1, linetype = "solid"
      ) +
      geom_line(
        data = acwr_ewma, aes(x = date, y = acwr_smooth),
        color = "red", linewidth = 1, linetype = "dashed"
      ) +
      labs(
        title = "ACWR: Rolling Average vs EWMA",
        subtitle = "Blue = RA (7:28d) | Red = EWMA (3.5:14d half-life)",
        x = "Date", y = "ACWR"
      ) +
      theme_minimal()

Key differences: - RA: Equal weight to all days in window; sudden jumps when old workouts exit window - EWMA: Exponential decay; smooth transitions; more responsive to recent changes

## Adding Confidence Bands

Confidence bands quantify uncertainty in ACWR estimates, essential for research reporting.

    # Calculate EWMA with 95% confidence bands
    acwr_ewma_ci <- calculate_acwr_ewma(
      activities,
      activity_type = "Run",
      method = "ewma",
      half_life_acute = 3.5,
      half_life_chronic = 14,
      load_metric = "duration_mins",
      ci = TRUE, # Enable confidence intervals
      B = 200, # Bootstrap iterations
      block_len = 7, # Block length (days) for bootstrap
      conf_level = 0.95 # 95% CI
    )

    # Plot with confidence bands
    ggplot(acwr_ewma_ci, aes(x = date)) +
      geom_ribbon(aes(ymin = acwr_lower, ymax = acwr_upper),
        fill = "gray70", alpha = 0.5
      ) +
      geom_line(aes(y = acwr_smooth), color = "black", linewidth = 1) +
      geom_hline(yintercept = c(0.8, 1.3), linetype = "dotted", color = "green") +
      geom_hline(yintercept = 1.5, linetype = "dotted", color = "red") +
      labs(
        title = "ACWR with 95% Confidence Bands",
        subtitle = "Gray band = bootstrap confidence interval",
        x = "Date", y = "ACWR"
      ) +
      theme_minimal()

Interpretation: - Gray band: 95% confidence interval from moving-block bootstrap - Wider bands = more uncertainty (e.g., during high load variability) - Narrower bands = more stable estimates

### Technical Note: Bootstrap Method

The confidence bands use moving-block bootstrap: 1. Daily load sequence is resampled in overlapping weekly blocks (preserves within-week correlation) 2. ACWR is recalculated for each bootstrap sample (B = 200 iterations) 3. 2.5th and 97.5th percentiles form the 95% confidence band

This approach is computationally efficient and doesn’t require distributional assumptions.

# 3. Cohort Reference Analysis

When analyzing multiple athletes (teams, research cohorts), it’s valuable to compare individuals to group norms.

## Multi-Athlete Setup

    # Load data for multiple athletes
    athlete1 <- load_local_activities("athlete1_export.zip") |>
      mutate(athlete_id = "athlete1", sex = "M", age_band = "25-35")

    athlete2 <- load_local_activities("athlete2_export.zip") |>
      mutate(athlete_id = "athlete2", sex = "F", age_band = "25-35")

    athlete3 <- load_local_activities("athlete3_export.zip") |>
      mutate(athlete_id = "athlete3", sex = "M", age_band = "35-45")

    # Combine
    cohort_data <- bind_rows(athlete1, athlete2, athlete3)

    # Calculate ACWR for each athlete
    cohort_acwr <- cohort_data |>
      group_by(athlete_id) |>
      group_modify(~ calculate_acwr_ewma(.x, activity_type = "Run", method = "ewma")) |>
      ungroup() |>
      mutate(type = "Run") |>
      left_join(
        cohort_data |> select(athlete_id, sex, age_band) |> distinct(),
        by = "athlete_id"
      )

## Calculate Reference Percentiles

    # Calculate cohort reference by activity type and sex
    reference <- calculate_cohort_reference(
      cohort_acwr,
      metric = "acwr_smooth",
      by = c("type", "sex"), # Group by activity type and sex
      probs = c(0.05, 0.25, 0.5, 0.75, 0.95), # Percentiles
      min_athletes = 3 # Minimum athletes per group
    )

    # View reference structure
    head(reference)

Output:

    # A tibble: 6 × 5
      date       type  sex   percentile value n_athletes
      <date>     <chr> <chr> <chr>      <dbl>      <int>
    1 2024-01-01 Run   M     p05        0.65          5
    2 2024-01-01 Run   M     p25        0.82          5
    3 2024-01-01 Run   M     p50        0.98          5
    4 2024-01-01 Run   M     p75        1.15          5
    5 2024-01-01 Run   M     p95        1.38          5

## Plot Individual vs Cohort

    # Extract one athlete's data
    individual <- cohort_acwr |>
      filter(athlete_id == "athlete1")

    # Plot with cohort reference
    p <- plot_with_reference(
      individual = individual,
      reference = reference |> filter(sex == "M"), # Match athlete's group
      metric = "acwr_smooth",
      bands = c("p25_p75", "p05_p95", "p50")
    )

    print(p)

Interpretation: - Black line: Individual athlete’s ACWR trend - Dark shaded area (P25-P75): “Normal” range (50% of cohort) - Light shaded area (P5-P95): Extended range (90% of cohort) - Dashed line (P50): Median (cohort center)

Use cases: - Outlier detection: Athletes consistently above P95 or below P5 - Load matching: Ensure similar load profiles when comparing injury rates - Benchmarking: Compare individual’s trajectory to team norms

# 4. Integrated Workflow Example

Here’s a complete research workflow combining all features:

    library(Athlytics)
    library(dplyr)
    library(ggplot2)

    # --- Step 1: Load multi-athlete cohort ---
    cohort_files <- c("athlete1_export.zip", "athlete2_export.zip", "athlete3_export.zip")
    cohort_data <- lapply(cohort_files, function(file) {
      load_local_activities(file) |>
        mutate(athlete_id = tools::file_path_sans_ext(basename(file)))
    }) |> bind_rows()

    # --- Step 2: Quality control (conceptual - for stream data) ---
    # If you have stream data, flag quality before calculating metrics
    # stream <- parse_activity_file("path/to/activity.fit")
    # flagged <- flag_quality(stream, sport = "Run")
    # summary <- summarize_quality(flagged)

    # --- Step 3: Calculate ACWR with EWMA + CI ---
    cohort_acwr <- cohort_data |>
      group_by(athlete_id) |>
      group_modify(~ calculate_acwr_ewma(
        .x,
        activity_type = "Run",
        method = "ewma",
        half_life_acute = 3.5,
        half_life_chronic = 14,
        load_metric = "duration_mins",
        ci = TRUE,
        B = 100 # Reduced for speed in example
      )) |>
      ungroup() |>
      mutate(type = "Run")

    # --- Step 4: Calculate cohort reference ---
    reference <- calculate_cohort_reference(
      cohort_acwr,
      metric = "acwr_smooth",
      by = c("type"),
      probs = c(0.05, 0.25, 0.5, 0.75, 0.95),
      min_athletes = 3
    )

    # --- Step 5: Visualize individual with confidence + cohort ---
    individual <- cohort_acwr |> filter(athlete_id == "athlete1")

    p <- plot_with_reference(individual, reference, metric = "acwr_smooth") +
      # Add individual's confidence bands
      geom_ribbon(
        data = individual,
        aes(x = date, ymin = acwr_lower, ymax = acwr_upper),
        fill = "blue", alpha = 0.2
      )

    print(p)

    # --- Step 6: Export for statistical analysis ---
    write.csv(cohort_acwr, "cohort_acwr_with_ci.csv", row.names = FALSE)
    write.csv(reference, "cohort_reference.csv", row.names = FALSE)

# 5. Methodological Notes for Research

## ACWR Method Selection

Method | Pros | Cons | Recommended Use
--- | --- | --- | ---
RA (Rolling Average) | Stable, well-established, simple interpretation | Sudden jumps, equal weight to all days | Descriptive studies, replicating prior work
EWMA | Smooth, responsive, customizable decay | More parameters, less established norms | Monitoring, sensitive change detection

Default parameters: - RA: 7-day acute, 28-day chronic (most common in literature) - EWMA: 3.5-day acute half-life, 14-day chronic half-life (equivalent decay)

## Confidence Bands Limitations

- Not causal inference: Bands reflect sampling variability, not prediction of injury
- Assumes stationarity: If training pattern changes fundamentally, past data may not be representative
- Block length matters: Default 7-day blocks preserve weekly structure; adjust if training cycle differs

## Cohort Reference Interpretation

⚠️ Critical distinction: Percentile bands are descriptive population variability, NOT confidence intervals for an individual’s “true” value.

Correct interpretation: - “Athlete was above the 75th percentile of the cohort” ✅ - “Athlete’s ACWR was significantly higher than cohort” ❌ (requires statistical test)

Minimum sample sizes: - P25-P75: n ≥ 5 athletes - P5-P95: n ≥ 20 athletes (for stable extremes)

# 6. FAQ for Advanced Features

Q: How do I choose EWMA half-life?
A: Start with defaults (3.5:14d ≈ 7:28d RA). For more responsive monitoring, reduce both proportionally (e.g., 2.5:10d). For smoother trends, increase (e.g., 5:20d).

Q: Bootstrap is slow. Can I reduce B?
A: Yes. B = 50–100 is often sufficient for visual inspection. For publication, use B = 200–500.

Q: What if my cohort has < 5 athletes?
A: Set `min_athletes = 3`, but report this limitation. Percentiles with n < 5 are unstable.

Q: Can I use these methods for injury prediction?
A: No. These are descriptive monitoring tools. Injury prediction requires proper case-control studies, controlling for confounders, and validation. See: Carey, D. L., et al. (2018). Predictive modelling of training loads and injury in Australian football. International Journal of Computer Science in Sport, 17(1), 49-66. DOI: 10.2478/ijcss-2018-0002; Impellizzeri, F. M., et al. (2021). What role do chronic workloads play in the acute to chronic workload ratio? Time to dismiss ACWR and its underlying theory. Sports Medicine, 51(3), 581-592. DOI: 10.1007/s40279-020-01378-6

Q: How do I cite Athlytics?
A: Use the standard software citation format with version number and repository URL. See the main tutorial for the complete citation.

# Session Info

    sessionInfo()
    #> R version 4.6.0 (2026-04-24)
    #> Platform: aarch64-apple-darwin23
    #> Running under: macOS Tahoe 26.5
    #>
    #> Matrix products: default
    #> BLAS:   /Library/Frameworks/R.framework/Versions/4.6/Resources/lib/libRblas.0.dylib
    #> LAPACK: /Library/Frameworks/R.framework/Versions/4.6/Resources/lib/libRlapack.dylib;  LAPACK version 3.12.1
    #>
    #> locale:
    #> [1] C.UTF-8/C.UTF-8/C.UTF-8/C/C.UTF-8/C.UTF-8
    #>
    #> time zone: Asia/Shanghai
    #> tzcode source: internal
    #>
    #> attached base packages:
    #> [1] stats     graphics  grDevices utils     datasets  methods   base
    #>
    #> loaded via a namespace (and not attached):
    #>  [1] digest_0.6.39   R6_2.6.1        fastmap_1.2.0   xfun_0.57
    #>  [5] cachem_1.1.0    knitr_1.51      htmltools_0.5.9 rmarkdown_2.31
    #>  [9] lifecycle_1.0.5 cli_3.6.6       sass_0.4.10     jquerylib_0.1.4
    #> [13] compiler_4.6.0  tools_4.6.0     evaluate_1.0.5  bslib_0.10.0
    #> [17] yaml_2.3.12     rlang_1.2.0     jsonlite_2.0.0