MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2125150144 · doi:10.1177/1527002506294938

The Incentive Effects of Overtime Rules in Professional Hockey

2007· article· en· W2125150144 on OpenAlex
Neil Longley, S. Sankaran

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Sports Economics · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicSports Analytics and Performance
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIce hockeyIncentiveOvertimeLeagueTournamentStochastic gameEconomicsPerceptionAdversaryMicroeconomicsMarketingBusinessPsychologyComputer scienceLabour economicsComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article analyzes the incentive effects of the National Hockey League's overtime-loss rule by offering an alternative theoretical framework to that of Abrevaya, whose article recently appeared in this journal. Although his theoretical model implied that all teams would find it beneficial to adopt defensive strategies during the late stages of regulation time of a tied game, the model used in this article shows that there are situations where teams will forego such defensive strategies and continue to play offensively aggressive. In particular, the authors show that this decision as to which on-ice strategy to adopt depends crucially on a team's perception of its own on-ice strength, relative to that of its opponent. Using this behavioral model also allows the authors to analyze and compare the incentive effects of a wide range of alternative payoff structures, including the structure currently used in European soccer.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.053
Threshold uncertainty score0.374

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.199 · 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