利用韩国棒球委员会（KBO）的自动好球带（ABS）系统转型审计人类好球坏球判罚中的情境偏差
Auditing Contextual Bias in Human Ball-Strike Calls Using KBO's Automated Umpiring Transition
- Yonsei University, School of Integrated Technology（延世大学综合技术学院）
机构由 AI 辅助整理，请以论文原文为准。
AI总结：
本文以KBO的ABS系统转型为基准，发现人类裁判在球数和比赛进程上存在好球判罚的情境偏差，ABS下此类偏差基本消失，未发现人类裁判普遍存在偏差
AI中文摘要：
本文利用韩国棒球委员会（KBO）采用自动好球带（ABS）系统的契机，对人类好球坏球判罚中长期存在的情境偏差主张进行审计。我们使用2021年至2026赛季可用部分的KBO投球级数据，对好球带边界附近投球的判为好球概率进行建模，将2022-2023赛季作为人类裁判的主要基准，将2024年及之后的ABS赛季作为诊断基准。最有力的证据涉及球数压力：相对于0-0球数，人类裁判在两好球球数中判罚好球的数量大幅减少，在打者领先的三坏球球数中判罚好球的数量更多。具体而言，在0.25英尺的主要边界带中，0-2球数关联-17.17个百分点的效应，3-0球数关联+6.61个百分点的效应。在ABS下，相应效应接近零，且未通过错误发现率校正。比赛进程显示出较小但一致的模式：人类判罚在早期局数中较少倾向于好球，在7-9局及以后（尤其是比分接近的后期局数）更倾向于好球，而完整的ABS赛季基本保持平稳。其他疑似偏差较弱或更具局部性：基于薪资的声誉代理提供了暗示性但对代理敏感的证据，捕手身份在人类时期显示出残留异质性，在ABS下消失；主场情境证据在裁判层面大多无效，存在一个经FDR显著的人类时期例外，以及一个探索性的裁判-球队差距，最好视为审计线索。总体而言，结果并未表明人类裁判在所有方面都存在偏差，而是明确了人类好球带最具情境敏感性的区域、证据较弱的区域，以及常见怀疑几乎未得到支持的区域。
英文摘要：
This paper uses the Korean Baseball Organization's adoption of the Automated Ball-Strike (ABS) system to audit long-standing claims about contextual bias in human ball-strike calls. Using pitch-level KBO data from 2021 through the available portion of the 2026 season, we model called-strike probability for taken pitches near the strike-zone boundary, with 2022-2023 as the primary human-umpire baseline and ABS seasons (2024 and onward) as a diagnostic benchmark. The strongest evidence concerns count pressure. Relative to 0--0 counts, human umpires called substantially fewer strikes in two-strike counts and more strikes in hitter-ahead three-ball counts. Specifically, in the main 0.25-ft boundary band, 0--2 was associated with a -17.17 percentage-point effect and 3--0 with a +6.61 percentage-point effect. Under ABS, the corresponding effects were close to zero and did not survive false-discovery-rate correction. Game progression shows a smaller but coherent pattern as human calls were less strike-prone in early innings and more strike-prone in innings 7--9+, especially in late-close situations, while complete ABS seasons were essentially flat. Other suspected biases are weaker or more localized. Salary-based reputation proxies provide suggestive but proxy-sensitive evidence, and catcher identity shows human-period residual heterogeneity that disappears under ABS. Home-context evidence is mostly null at the umpire level, with one FDR-significant human-period exception and an exploratory umpire-team gap best treated as an audit lead. Overall, the results do not show that human umpires were biased everywhere. Instead, they map where the human strike zone was most context-sensitive, where evidence was weaker, and where common suspicions received little support.
