Measuring Seat Value in Stadiums and Theaters
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We study how the seat value perceived by consumers attending an event in a theater/stadium depends on the location of their seat relative to the stage/field. We develop a measure of seat value, called the Seat Value Index, and relate it to seat location and consumer characteristics. We implement our analysis on a proprietary data set that a professional baseball franchise in Japan collected from its customers, and provide recommendations. For instance, we find that customers seated in symmetric seats on left and right fields might derive very different valuations from the seats. We also find that the more frequent visitors to the stadium report extreme seat value less often when compared with first‐time visitors. Our findings and insights remain robust to the effects of price and game‐related factors. Thus, our research quantifies the significant influence of seat location on the ex‐post seat value perceived by customers. Utilizing the heterogeneity in seat values at different seat locations, we provide segment‐specific pricing recommendations based on a service‐level objective that would limit the fraction of customers experiencing low seat value to a desired threshold.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it