MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2527566398 · doi:10.4236/jss.2016.49001

Data Analysis Instance for NBA Star Shooting

2016· article· en· W2527566398 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Zhengyang Xie, Junhui Gao

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen Journal of Social Sciences · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicSports Analytics and Performance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStar (game theory)Point (geometry)Order (exchange)Position (finance)Quarter (Canadian coin)Computer scienceMathematicsComputer graphics (images)AdvertisingGeographyEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we analyze the field data of NBA star players. We choose 25 of them and download the data from the NBA official website. The data is statistically analyzed from all aspects: the position of the player, the location on the court, the time order of two points and three points and the combination of these elements. We get some results according to the analysis. For example, players of all five positions prefer to make shots right ahead the basketry; attempts of three points reach the climax during the third quarter; over the last five minutes of the game, the rate of the number of two-point attempts is the lowest and that of three-point attempts is the highest at the 46th minute.

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)0.004
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 score0.774
Threshold uncertainty score0.539

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.000
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 head0.250
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.114 · 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

Citations1
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen Journal of Social SciencesSame topicSports Analytics and PerformanceFrench-language works237,207