MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2886222135 · doi:10.1177/1012690218789045

It’s cold and there’s something to do: The changing geography of Canadian National Hockey League players’ hometowns

2018· article· en· W2886222135 on OpenAlexaffabout
Lisa Kaida, Peter Kitchen

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Review for the Sociology of Sport · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSport and Mega-Event Impacts
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLeagueCensusGeographyOddsPopulationDemographic economicsDemographyCartographyAdvertisingSocioeconomicsPolitical scienceSociologyMedicineBusinessEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Set within the framework of the birthplace effect literature and the seminal work of Curtis and Birch, this paper draws information from the publicly available database www.hockeydb.com and from the Census to examine the hometowns of Canadian National Hockey League (NHL) players from 1970 to 2015. It found that from a regional perspective, the distribution of players’ hometowns remained fairly stable over the 46-year period with Ontario and the three Prairie provinces being prominent. Players from small centres have been well represented in the NHL. While larger urban areas have historically produced the most players, there has been a marked increase in ‘big city’ players while the odds of making it are low. However, when the analysis is adjusted according to the population aged 10-19, boys growing up in small and mid-sized centres were at advantage in reaching the NHL until 2009. Finally, we discuss whether the growing presence of big city players in the NHL will affect the image of hockey as a national sport, as for many, small-town hockey remains at the heart of Canadian sporting culture.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.050
Threshold uncertainty score0.360

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0050.011
Science and technology studies0.0050.005
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.368
Teacher spread0.310 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations6
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Review for the Sociology of SportSame topicSport and Mega-Event ImpactsFrench-language works237,207