平衡专家意见和历史数据:棒球裁判的案例

R. Valerdi
{"title":"平衡专家意见和历史数据:棒球裁判的案例","authors":"R. Valerdi","doi":"10.1080/1941658X.2016.1267456","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Many decisions benefit from situations where there exist both ample expert opinion and historical data. In cost modeling these may include the costs of software development, the learning curve rates for specific manufacturing tasks, and the unit rate costs of operating certain products. When making forecasts we are often faced with the decision to base our estimates on either expert opinion or historical data. When these two perspectives converge, we have high confidence in the estimate. The more interesting case is when they contradict. This is where the estimator needs to dig deeper in order to determine the sources of inconsistencies. Cost modelers are not the only ones who struggle with deciding whether to trust experts or data. Data scientists are increasingly dealing with this duality especially in the context of professional sports where expert opinion is associated with the traditional viewpoint and data-driven decision making is associated with a more modern approach. In the United States, professional sports teams are increasingly using analytics to optimize their athletes’ performance as well as their business operations (Pelton, 2015). But the culture of professional sports still depends heavily on experience and gut feel. The case of baseball umpires provides a good example of expert opinion being preferred over historical data. In professional baseball, the umpire’s job is to determine whether the ball passed the strike zone1 or not. If the batter does not swing it is left to the umpire’s expert judgement to identify whether the pitch was a ball or a strike. The strike zone is defined in the official rules of baseball and are not subject to interpretation, however, the implementation of measuring said strike zone is entirely left to human judgement. Even more challenging is that the decision must be made in a matter of seconds under extreme pressure. Chen, Moskowitz, and Shue (2016) analyzed baseball umpire data using the PITCHf/x system that tracks the actual location of each pitch using multiple cameras. By comparing the umpire’s decision to the actual placement of the ball relative to the strike zone they determined that, during the 2008 to 2016 seasons which included 127 different umpires calling over 3.5 million pitches, umpires were correct only part of the time as shown in Table 1. If baseball umpires are getting one out of every eight ball/strike calls wrong, this adds up to more than 30,000 mistakes a year. In most industries, and even other professional sports leagues, this would be unacceptable but baseball traditionalists are hesitant to adopt new technologies that remove the human element from the game.","PeriodicalId":390877,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Cost Analysis and Parametrics","volume":"57 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Balancing Expert Opinion and Historical Data: The Case of Baseball Umpires\",\"authors\":\"R. Valerdi\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/1941658X.2016.1267456\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Many decisions benefit from situations where there exist both ample expert opinion and historical data. In cost modeling these may include the costs of software development, the learning curve rates for specific manufacturing tasks, and the unit rate costs of operating certain products. When making forecasts we are often faced with the decision to base our estimates on either expert opinion or historical data. When these two perspectives converge, we have high confidence in the estimate. The more interesting case is when they contradict. This is where the estimator needs to dig deeper in order to determine the sources of inconsistencies. Cost modelers are not the only ones who struggle with deciding whether to trust experts or data. Data scientists are increasingly dealing with this duality especially in the context of professional sports where expert opinion is associated with the traditional viewpoint and data-driven decision making is associated with a more modern approach. In the United States, professional sports teams are increasingly using analytics to optimize their athletes’ performance as well as their business operations (Pelton, 2015). But the culture of professional sports still depends heavily on experience and gut feel. The case of baseball umpires provides a good example of expert opinion being preferred over historical data. In professional baseball, the umpire’s job is to determine whether the ball passed the strike zone1 or not. If the batter does not swing it is left to the umpire’s expert judgement to identify whether the pitch was a ball or a strike. The strike zone is defined in the official rules of baseball and are not subject to interpretation, however, the implementation of measuring said strike zone is entirely left to human judgement. Even more challenging is that the decision must be made in a matter of seconds under extreme pressure. Chen, Moskowitz, and Shue (2016) analyzed baseball umpire data using the PITCHf/x system that tracks the actual location of each pitch using multiple cameras. By comparing the umpire’s decision to the actual placement of the ball relative to the strike zone they determined that, during the 2008 to 2016 seasons which included 127 different umpires calling over 3.5 million pitches, umpires were correct only part of the time as shown in Table 1. If baseball umpires are getting one out of every eight ball/strike calls wrong, this adds up to more than 30,000 mistakes a year. In most industries, and even other professional sports leagues, this would be unacceptable but baseball traditionalists are hesitant to adopt new technologies that remove the human element from the game.\",\"PeriodicalId\":390877,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Cost Analysis and Parametrics\",\"volume\":\"57 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2016-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Cost Analysis and Parametrics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/1941658X.2016.1267456\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Cost Analysis and Parametrics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/1941658X.2016.1267456","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

许多决策都受益于既有充分的专家意见又有历史数据的情况。在成本建模中,这些成本可能包括软件开发的成本,特定制造任务的学习曲线率,以及操作某些产品的单位成本。在做预测时,我们经常面临这样的决定:是根据专家意见还是根据历史数据进行估计。当这两种观点汇合时,我们对估计有很高的信心。更有趣的是当它们相互矛盾的时候。这就是评估人员需要深入挖掘的地方,以便确定不一致的来源。成本建模者并不是唯一在决定是相信专家还是相信数据方面苦苦挣扎的人。数据科学家越来越多地处理这种二元性,特别是在专业体育的背景下,专家意见与传统观点有关,而数据驱动的决策与更现代的方法有关。在美国,专业运动队越来越多地使用分析来优化运动员的表现以及他们的业务运营(Pelton, 2015)。但职业体育文化仍然在很大程度上依赖于经验和直觉。棒球裁判的案例提供了一个专家意见比历史数据更受欢迎的好例子。在职业棒球比赛中,裁判的工作是判断球是否越过好球区。如果击球手没有挥棒,则由裁判的专家判断该球是好球还是好球。好球区在棒球的官方规则中有定义,不受解释的约束,但是,测量好球区的实施完全由人类判断。更具有挑战性的是,在极端的压力下,必须在几秒钟内做出决定。Chen, Moskowitz和Shue(2016)使用PITCHf/x系统分析了棒球裁判的数据,该系统使用多个摄像头跟踪每个投球的实际位置。通过比较裁判员的决定和球相对于好球带的实际位置,他们确定,在2008年至2016年的赛季中,有127名不同的裁判员判罚了超过350万个球,裁判员只有部分时间是正确的,如表1所示。如果棒球裁判每8个球/好球的判罚中就有1个是错误的,那么每年就会有3万多个错误。在大多数行业,甚至其他职业体育联盟中,这将是不可接受的,但棒球传统主义者对采用将人类因素从比赛中移除的新技术犹豫不决。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Balancing Expert Opinion and Historical Data: The Case of Baseball Umpires
Many decisions benefit from situations where there exist both ample expert opinion and historical data. In cost modeling these may include the costs of software development, the learning curve rates for specific manufacturing tasks, and the unit rate costs of operating certain products. When making forecasts we are often faced with the decision to base our estimates on either expert opinion or historical data. When these two perspectives converge, we have high confidence in the estimate. The more interesting case is when they contradict. This is where the estimator needs to dig deeper in order to determine the sources of inconsistencies. Cost modelers are not the only ones who struggle with deciding whether to trust experts or data. Data scientists are increasingly dealing with this duality especially in the context of professional sports where expert opinion is associated with the traditional viewpoint and data-driven decision making is associated with a more modern approach. In the United States, professional sports teams are increasingly using analytics to optimize their athletes’ performance as well as their business operations (Pelton, 2015). But the culture of professional sports still depends heavily on experience and gut feel. The case of baseball umpires provides a good example of expert opinion being preferred over historical data. In professional baseball, the umpire’s job is to determine whether the ball passed the strike zone1 or not. If the batter does not swing it is left to the umpire’s expert judgement to identify whether the pitch was a ball or a strike. The strike zone is defined in the official rules of baseball and are not subject to interpretation, however, the implementation of measuring said strike zone is entirely left to human judgement. Even more challenging is that the decision must be made in a matter of seconds under extreme pressure. Chen, Moskowitz, and Shue (2016) analyzed baseball umpire data using the PITCHf/x system that tracks the actual location of each pitch using multiple cameras. By comparing the umpire’s decision to the actual placement of the ball relative to the strike zone they determined that, during the 2008 to 2016 seasons which included 127 different umpires calling over 3.5 million pitches, umpires were correct only part of the time as shown in Table 1. If baseball umpires are getting one out of every eight ball/strike calls wrong, this adds up to more than 30,000 mistakes a year. In most industries, and even other professional sports leagues, this would be unacceptable but baseball traditionalists are hesitant to adopt new technologies that remove the human element from the game.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Editorial Board EOV Multiproduct Cost-Volume-Profit Model: A Resource Reallocation Approach for Decision Making Dynamics of New Building Construction Costs: Implications for Forecasting Escalation Allowances Balancing Expert Opinion and Historical Data: The Case of Baseball Umpires Using Robust Statistical Methodology to Evaluate the Cost Performance of Project Delivery Systems: A Case Study of Horizontal Construction
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1