MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4294839455 · doi:10.3390/math10183228

Neural Network-Based Modeling for Risk Evaluation and Early Warning for Large-Scale Sports Events

2022· article· en· W4294839455 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

VenueMathematics · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiverse Approaches in Healthcare and Education Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScale (ratio)Variance (accounting)Sample (material)Warning systemRisk managementComputer scienceEvent (particle physics)Risk assessmentRisk analysis (engineering)BusinessGeographyComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

[Problem] The risks of hosting large-scale sports events are very difficult to evaluate and often directly affected by natural environment risks, events management risks, and social environment risks. Before hosting the events, accurately assessing these risks can effectively minimize the occurrence of risks and reduce the subsequent losses. [Aim] In this article, we advocate the use of a back propagation neural network (BPNN) model for risk evaluation and early warning of large-scale sports events. [Methods] We first use expert surveys to assess the risks of 28 large-scale sports events using 12 indicators associated with climate conditions, events management, and natural disasters. We then apply the BPNN model to evaluate the risks of 28 large-scale sports events with sufficient samples by adding white noise with mean zero and small variance to the small actual samples. We provide a general rule to establish a BPNN model with insufficient and small samples. [Results] Our research results show that the recognition accuracy of the established BPNN model is 86.7% for the 15 simulation samples and 100% for the 28 actual samples. Based on this BPNN model, we determined and ranked the risk level of the events and the importance of each indicator. Thus, sample S8 had the highest risk and the second highest was sample S14, and indicator nine was the most important and indicator one the least important. [Conclusions] We can apply the established BPNN model to conveniently evaluate the risk of hosting a large-scale sports event. By analyzing the nonlinear relationship between each indicator and the risk of the sports event, and applying the established BPNN model, we can propose more targeted and effective measures and suggestions for eliminating and decreasing the risks of hosting a large-scale sports event, and ensure large-scale sports events can be successfully hosted.

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)0.002
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.647
Threshold uncertainty score0.367

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.130
GPT teacher head0.372
Teacher spread0.243 · 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