MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3090210076 · doi:10.18060/23969

An Examination of the Effectiveness of the Elam Ending at TBT2018 and TBT2019

2020· article· en· W3090210076 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Nicholas P. Elam

Bibliographic record

VenueSports Innovation Journal · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicSports Analytics and Performance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBasketballLeagueTournamentPsychologyAdvertisingHistoryBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Elam Ending calls for the final portion of each basketball game to be played without a game clock, as a way to preserve a more natural style of play through the end of every game. The rule aims to address certain late-game strategies and phenomena attributable to the game clock under basketball’s traditional, fully timed format. The Elam Ending was first implemented by TBT: The Basketball Tournament, in 2017. Since then, the format has been implemented in subsequent editions of TBT, the 2020 NBA All-Star Game, and the FIBA-sanctioned Canadian Elite Basketball League. However, limited research exists examining the effectiveness of the Elam Ending in meeting its aims. Elam (2019) used quantitative descriptive data to examine the only 11 games played under the Elam Ending at TBT2017. This study replicates the previous study, examining all 134 games played under the Elam Ending at TBT2018 and TBT2019. This study shows the Elam Ending to be effective in meeting all of its aims at TBT2018, and even more so at TBT2019 after the format was slightly modified. This study can be particularly useful for any organizer or stakeholder involved with a basketball league/event considering implementation of the Elam Ending.

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)0.002
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 score0.084
Threshold uncertainty score0.180

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.195 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSports Innovation JournalSame topicSports Analytics and PerformanceFrench-language works237,207