System design

How the architecture holds its boundary

A production system is defined by what it refuses as much as what it accepts. Move from a match-wide pattern to the exact rally and frame, add human tactical context, and leave with a small number of reviewable priorities.

Control planes

Racket perception pipeline

A staged perception pipeline detects court, players, ball, contacts, bounces, and rally structure.

Frame-addressable event graph

A frame-addressable event graph links tactical statements back to source moments and confidence.

Human-reviewed debrief

The debrief layer groups repeatable patterns and preserves coach annotation rather than replacing it.

Request lifecycle

owner-authorized match upload
  → court, player, ball, bounce, and contact inference
  → rally and point event graph
  → frame-linked tactical pattern extraction
  → player or coach review and annotation
  → bounded debrief and next-practice priorities

Failure model

Unreadable frames, weak court geometry, ambiguous contact, duplicate work, and incomplete artifacts remain visible and cannot become confident coaching claims.

Verification checklist

Frame provenance: Every derived event retains a source frame or an explicit unavailable state.
Visible uncertainty: Ambiguity is surfaced; the system does not manufacture contact, intent, or line truth.
Owner isolation: Video, jobs, reports, shares, and deletion remain owner-scoped.
Human tactical authority: Automation indexes evidence; player and coach make the tactical judgment.

← Back to overview