MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3126300937 · doi:10.1123/smej.2019-0070

Sport Analytics Education for Future Executives, Managers, and Nontechnical Personnel

2021· article· en· W3126300937 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueSport Management Education Journal · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicSports Analytics and Performance
Canadian institutionsBrock University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnalyticsBusiness analyticsCurriculumExperiential learningKnowledge managementSport managementBusinessPublic relationsPsychologyComputer scienceMarketingBusiness analysisData scienceBusiness modelPedagogyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Successfully adopting sport business analytics to enhance organization-wide business processes necessitates a combination of business acumen, modeling expertise, personnel coordination, and organizational support. Although the development of technical skills has been well mapped in analytics curricula, informing future leadership and affiliated nontechnical personnel about the sport business analytics process, specifically, remains a gap in sport management curricula. This acknowledgment should compel sport management programs to explore strategies for sport analytics training geared toward this population. Guided by experiential learning and foundational business analytics frameworks, a seven-module approach to teaching sport business analytics in sport management is advanced with a particular focus for future executives, managers, and nontechnical users in the sport industry. Concomitantly, the approach presents learning goals and outcomes, sources for instructors to review and consider, and sample assessments designed to fit within the existing sport management curricula.

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.

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 score0.831
Threshold uncertainty score0.813

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.227 · 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