跳到正文
研踪PaperTrail
← 研踪 PaperTrail

arXiv:2509.10600 · v8

Racing to the Starting Line: Measuring Opportunity and Improvement in Cross Country

首次提交 2025-09-13 01:50
版本更新 2026-11-10 02:24
雷达观测 2026-11-10 15:22
arXiv ↗PDF ↗

摘要

Collegiate cross country programs set race schedules without large comparable datasets across courses and conditions. Using the comprehensive-era National Running Club Database (NRCD; 23,360 results; 7,056 athletes; 2023-2025), where course and weather coverage exceed 99%, we ask what public results can identify about seasonal improvement, measurement, and racing opportunity. Hierarchical models of Standardized times recover pooled within-season improvement of about -5.7 s/week for men and -5.2 for women, but reading those slopes as fitness requires residual meet difficulty not to track the calendar: crossed meet effects can erase the week slope, while repeating-venue effects recover a clearer men's estimate under a weaker assumption. After the opener, race-1-only forecasts of who will improve are near noise (held-out R^2 ~ 0). Weather standardization remains a useful convention (Converted Only overstates first-to-last gains by about 15-21 s relative to Standardized), and prospectively trained venue factors modestly help where prior course data exist. Successful programs race more and place higher at nationals, but that may not be why they win: the schedule-placement link is between programs and is entangled with roster size, not evidence that changing one team's race count raises nationals place.

AI 论文解读

基于摘要 · 非全文审阅

基于NRCD大规模越野跑成绩数据,用分层模型估计赛季内标准化成绩的周进步幅度,并讨论赛程安排与项目成功之间的关联。

正在读取账号与研究记录…

版本差异

目前只观测到一个版本,无法比较变化。之后收录新版本时,会在这里对照标题、作者、分类和摘要。

观测到的版本

相邻记录可能跳过中间版本;首次发现 v2 及以上也会标为版本更新。

v8 · 2026-11-10 02:24 · 最新观测版本

Racing to the Starting Line: Measuring Opportunity and Improvement in Cross Country

Collegiate cross country programs set race schedules without large comparable datasets across courses and conditions. Using the comprehensive-era National Running Club Database (NRCD; 23,360 results; 7,056 athletes; 2023-2025), where course and weather coverage exceed 99%, we ask what public results can identify about seasonal improvement, measurement, and racing opportunity. Hierarchical models of Standardized times recover pooled within-season improvement of about -5.7 s/week for men and -5.2 for women, but reading those slopes as fitness requires residual meet difficulty not to track the calendar: crossed meet effects can erase the week slope, while repeating-venue effects recover a clearer men's estimate under a weaker assumption. After the opener, race-1-only forecasts of who will improve are near noise (held-out R^2 ~ 0). Weather standardization remains a useful convention (Converted Only overstates first-to-last gains by about 15-21 s relative to Standardized), and prospectively trained venue factors modestly help where prior course data exist. Successful programs race more and place higher at nationals, but that may not be why they win: the schedule-placement link is between programs and is entangled with roster size, not evidence that changing one team's race count raises nationals place.

查看此版本解读 →查看此版本原文 ↗