arXiv AI By Jonathan A. Karr Jr, Ryan M. Fryer, Nitesh V. Chawla

Faster Results from a Smarter Schedule: Reframing Collegiate Cross Country through Analysis of the National Running Club Database

Read the original on arXiv AI →

arXiv:2509. 10600v5 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Collegiate cross country teams often build their season schedules on intuition rather than evidence, partly because large-scale performance datasets were not publicly accessible prior to the National Running Club Database (NRCD).

Machine-generated by The Flow from the publisher's headline and feed description — not written or checked by a human. The full article lives at arXiv AI.

arXiv Machine Learning
Aug 18

NRCD: An Open Database of Collegiate Running with Unified Performance Standardization

arXiv:2608. 14776v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Collegiate running in the United States generates thousands of race results annually in cross country and track and field, yet no large-scale dataset has been publicly available for research.

By Jonathan A. Karr Jr., Ryan M. Fryer, Ben Darden, Nicholas Pell, Kayla Ambrose, Evan Hall, Ramzi K. Bualuan, Nitesh V. Chawla
arXiv Machine Learning
Sep 14

When Minute-Resolution Monitoring Meets Session-Level Injury Labels: Landmark-Based Discrimination in Elite Women's Football

The study introduces a framework that reconciles minute‑resolution athlete monitoring data with injury labels that are only available at the session level. By creating fixed‑time landmarks (10, 20, 30, 40, 50, and 60 minutes) and generating a single representation per athlete‑session up to each landmark, the authors evaluate several machine‑learning models and data‑augmentation strategies on elite women’s football data. Results show that discrimination varies across landmarks, with TabPFN outperforming Logistic Regression at later landmarks but not consistently beating Random Forest, and that synthetic augmentation offers benefits only in specific conditions.

By Evangelos Chatzidimitriou, Konstantinos Tserpes
arXiv Machine Learning
Sep 24

Evaluation Choices Decide the Forecasting Leaderboard: Evidence from a Production Marketplace Panel

The paper demonstrates that the outcome of a forecasting leaderboard is largely determined by the evaluator’s design choices rather than the models themselves. By fixing the data, horizon, and period, the authors varied three key evaluation decisions—unit of analysis, error pooling, and scoring metric—and showed that each can reverse or eliminate the apparent superiority of any forecasting method. The study also evaluates the practical impact of these choices on a deployed system, revealing that the selection rule captures a significant portion of the potential performance gain, and confirms the findings on an external public dataset.

By Md Rezwanul Islam, Wael Mohammed