MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3171741909 · doi:10.1123/cssm.2021-0001

Empty Stands and Empty Pockets: Revenue Generation in a Pandemic

2021· article· en· W3171741909 on OpenAlex
Suzannah Mork Armentrout, Jen Zdroik, Julia Dutove

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

VenueCase Studies in Sport Management · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDigital Marketing and Social Media
Canadian institutionsNorthwestern Polytechnic
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPurchasingRevenueCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)PandemicBusinessMeaning (existential)MarketingPublic relationsStakeholderAdvertisingPolitical sciencePsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The COVID-19 pandemic changed not only the way professional sports were played in 2020, but also changed the way sport-related organizations had to operate. An example of this is a fictional sports app, FanStand, that primarily offered opportunities for sports teams to engage fans through team information, in-game trivia and contests, services at games, and the purchasing of tickets and merchandise. The primary use of the app was inside arenas and stadiums, meaning that when COVID-19 stopped all play, the app was not used. Even as professional sport returned to play, fans were not attending in-person games and were not using the app. The purpose of this case study is to consider how apps like FanStand can generate revenue during the COVID-19 outbreak and beyond, using strategic and operational planning, as well as stakeholder theory, to account for various groups and individuals who are impacted by the decisions FanStand makes during this time.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.549
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.070
GPT teacher head0.375
Teacher spread0.305 · 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