Black Swan Models for the Entertainment Industry with an Application to the Movie Business
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Success in popular entertainment is highly unpredictable. Yet it is the high-impact low-probability events---known as `black swans'---that drive entertainment industry profitability because success is highly concentrated on a small number of winners. In this research, we apply recently-developed statistical tools to model motion-picture success; these tools explicitly account for rare extreme events while permitting valid statistical inferences to be made on how product attributes are associated with product success. The specific empirical application relates the attributes of a film and its theatrical release to the distribution of worldwide cumulative box-office revenue. A regression model with skew-stable random disturbances is applied to a large sample of motion pictures to quantify the correlates of film success while explicitly accounting for skewness and heavy tails. The skew-stable estimates are compared to estimates obtained from symmetric-stable regression, ordinary least-squares regression, and several alternative robust-to-outliers regression models. Failure to control explicitly for heavy tails and skewness leads to misleading statistical inferences, particularly regarding the impact of production budget, opening week screens, and star power on a film's success at the box-office.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".