4.7 Article

Towards smart-data: Improving predictive accuracy in long-term football team performance

期刊

KNOWLEDGE-BASED SYSTEMS
卷 124, 期 -, 页码 93-104

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.knosys.2017.03.005

关键词

Data engineering; Dynamic Bayesian networks; Expert systems; Favourite-longshot bias; Football predictions; Knowledge engineering; Smart data; Soccer predictions

资金

  1. European Research Council (ERC) [ERC2013-AdG339182-BAYES_KNOWLEDGE]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Despite recent promising developments with large datasets and machine learning, the idea that automation alone can discover all key relationships between factors of interest remains a challenging task. Indeed, in many real-world domains, experts can often understand and identify key relationships that data alone may fail to discover, no matter how large the dataset. Hence, while pure machine learning provides obvious benefits, these benefits may come at a cost of accuracy. Here we focus on what we call smart-data; a method which supports data engineering and knowledge engineering approaches that put greater emphasis on applying causal knowledge and real-world 'facts' to the process of model development, driven by what data are really required for prediction, rather than by what data are available. We demonstrate how we exploited knowledge to develop a model that generates accurate predictions of the evolving performance of football teams based on limited data. The model enables us to predict, before a season starts, the total league points a team is expected to accumulate throughout the season. The results compare favourably against a number of other relevant and different types of models, and are on par with some other models which use far more data. The model results also provide a novel and comprehensive attribution study of the factors most influencing change in team performance, and partly address the cause of the widely accepted favourite-longshot bias observed in bookies odds. (C) 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据