MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399218848 · doi:10.5040/9798400677120

Latino and African American Athletes Today

2004· book· en· W4399218848 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
David Porter

Bibliographic record

VenueGreenwood eBooks · 2004
Typebook
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicSports Analytics and Performance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBasketballAthletesAfrican americanQuarter (Canadian coin)HistoryGender studiesSociologyMedicineEthnology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

African Americans and Latino Americans have played an increasingly significant role in the ongoing saga of American sports—and not just in popular sports like basketball and baseball. This is the first comprehensive, multisport biographical resource to concentrate exclusively on the accomplishments, achievements, and personal struggles of notable African American and Latino American athletes of the last quarter century. A total of 175 important contemporary athletes—113 African Americans and 62 Latino Americans—are profiled. Most made significant contributions to their sport since 1990. Athletes include Roberto Alomar, Oscar De La Hoya, Forence Griffith Joyner, Evander Holyfield, Michael Johnson, Michael Jordan, Jackie Joyner-Kersee, Ray Lewis, Sammy Sosa, Serena and Venus Williams, Tiger Woods, and many more. Eighteen sports, from baseball to bobsledding, are covered. The profiles of the men and women include personal background information and athletic career achievements through 2002. Each athletic career is traced, including entrance into sport, major accomplishments, records set, awards and honors, and overall impact. Quotations from the athletes enrich each profile. Bibliographies and photos complement the entries.

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)0.001
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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.071
Threshold uncertainty score0.236

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0710.027

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.190
Teacher spread0.169 · 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
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGreenwood eBooksSame topicSports Analytics and PerformanceFrench-language works237,207