Feedback request: what are the biggest limitations of current force plate software?

[Marius Schober]

Dear all,

We are currently developing a new software platform for 1D and 3D force plate analysis and are trying to rethink the category from first principles rather than incrementally improving or copy from existing tools.

The focus is on:

• reducing setup and acquisition friction (especially for non-expert users),
• improving clarity of interpretation (less emphasis on raw signals, more on actionable outputs),
• supporting both practitioner workflows (sports/rehab) and advanced research use cases via a separate mode,
• and enabling broader hardware compatibility (including both 1D and 3D force plates, ideally vendor-agnostic where feasible).

Before we go too far down our own path, we would value input from those actively using force plates in research or applied settings.

Specifically:

• Which software platforms are you currently using (e.g., VALD, AMTI, Kistler, Bertec, Noraxon, Qualisys, Vicon, etc.)?
• What are the most persistent friction points in your day-to-day workflows?
• Where do current tools fall short in terms of:
  • acquisition and synchronization,
  • data quality validation,
  • analysis pipelines,
  • interoperability / data export,
  • or reproducibility?
• Are there capabilities you’ve had to build yourself (scripts, custom pipelines, etc.) that you believe should exist natively?
• How do you or these tools already use AI; where do you wish it exists?

We are particularly interested in gaps that are structural rather than cosmetic.

Happy to share more context if useful, but at this stage we are primarily listening not selling.

Many thanks in advance for any insights.

Marius