MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2157520004 · doi:10.6000/1929-7092.2013.02.30

Compensation Discrimination for Wide Receivers: Applying Quantile Regression to the National Football League

2013· article· en· W2157520004 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Nancy J. Burnett, Lee J. Van Scyoc

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Reviews on Global Economics · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicSports Analytics and Performance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLeagueFootballQuantile regressionCompensation (psychology)WageSports economicsQuantileEconomicsRace (biology)EconometricsAdvertisingLabour economicsBusinessPolitical sciencePsychologySociologyLawSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Keefer's recent article in the Journal of Sports Economics (2013) finds evidence of wage discrimination in the National Football League (NFL) market for linebackers. We examine the market for NFL wide receivers using similar techniques as Keefer, though we explore only rookies rather than all current players and wide receivers rather than linebackers. While we would expect to find stronger evidence of discrimination in the rookie market, as rookies are captured sellers, we find no pervasive pattern of pay discrimination by race in this market.

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 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)0.001
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.631
Threshold uncertainty score0.457

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.093
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.207 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations7
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Reviews on Global EconomicsSame topicSports Analytics and PerformanceFrench-language works237,207