MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2077501275 · doi:10.1177/1938965511434323

A Revenue Management Model for Casino Table Games

2012· article· en· W2077501275 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Michael Chen, Henry Tsai, Shiang‐Lih Chen McCain

Bibliographic record

VenueCornell Hospitality Quarterly · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicSports Analytics and Performance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRevenue managementRevenueDemand forecastingOperations researchTable (database)Yield managementIntuitionMarketingEconomicsDemand managementComputer scienceBusinessEngineeringFinanceData mining

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Revenue management (RM) principles can apply to casino table games just as they do many other service industry operations. Creating a sound and feasible RM model for casinos relies foremost on the ability to create a demand forecast that accounts for the intermittent demand patterns of casino table games. Using a modified Croston’s approach to forecast demand, this article proposes a revenue optimization model to help managers determine how many tables to open and what limits to set. Empirical tests of historical data for hourly demand at blackjack tables in a casino in Ontario, Canada, show that the theoretical win amounts derived using RM applications exceeded the theoretical win actually recorded by the casino. By recording players’ betting patterns and speed of play, the casino industry should be able to use this model to improve on the current practice of opening and closing tables according to intuition and historic demand patterns. With the data in hand, casinos should be able to implement the model without substantial difficulty.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.049

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.046
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.183 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations9
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCornell Hospitality QuarterlySame topicSports Analytics and PerformanceFrench-language works237,207