MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4213150777 · doi:10.1016/j.dib.2022.107955

Dataset of two decades of Tiger Woods press conferences and tournament performance

2022· article· en· W4213150777 on OpenAlexaff
David Pastoriza, Thierry Warin

Bibliographic record

VenueData in Brief · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicSports Analytics and Performance
Canadian institutionsHEC Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTournamentTigerVictorySentiment analysisComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceAffect (linguistics)Data scienceNatural language processingPsychologyPolitical scienceLawMathematicsCommunicationAlgorithmPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This data article describes a dataset that allows exploring the determinants of superstars' sentiment in tournaments. It consists of 1,284 press conferences of Tiger Woods in the PGA Tour between 1996 and 2020. We used natural language processing, a form of artificial intelligence, to extract and encode in a quantitative form the sentiment in Tiger Woods press conferences both before the tournament and after the rounds played. Additionally, the dataset provides a series of variables that describe Tiger Woods' scoring and performance momentum in each round and variables that describe health-related and off-the-course issues that could affect his performance on the course. This data can be useful to understand the sentiment that superstars go through before important tournaments, their sentiment following a major victory or defeat, how that sentiment evolves throughout their athletic career, and how sentiment is associated with performance momentum.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.054

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.007
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.014

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 head0.100
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.186 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreDataset

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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueData in BriefSame topicSports Analytics and PerformanceFrench-language works237,207