MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1586699406 · doi:10.5539/jsd.v8n6p119

Research on Principal-agent Problem of Tourism Attractions Development: A Case Study of Kaiping Diaolou

2015· article· en· W1586699406 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Chunfan Guo, Yan Tang

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Sustainable Development · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDiverse Aspects of Tourism Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersJinan University
KeywordsPrincipal (computer security)TourismGovernment (linguistics)BusinessPrincipal–agent problemResource (disambiguation)Task (project management)Principal partMarketingIndustrial organizationComputer scienceEconomicsFinanceManagementGeographyComputer securityCorporate governance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The value of Kaiping Diaolou as a world heritage site is gradually paid great attention from the public. Meanwhile, how to protect and develop it better becomes an important issue. From the perspective of principal-agent theory, the mode of “trusteeship of property right” (i.e., reserve the ownership to Diaolou of private owners and hand the business management right of Diaolou to the government for centralized management and operation of Diaolou) , which is adopted in development of tourism resources of Kaiping Diaolou, is studied in this paper. It is deemed that there are complicated principal-agent relationships existing among the owners of Diaolou, tourism development companies and the local government who participate in the tourism resource development of Kaiping Diaolou, such as bilateral principal-agent with single task, principal-agent with multiple tasks, principal-agent with multiple agents and multi-level principal-agent. Moreover, various principal-agent problems may occur in the further development of tourism resources. Finally, on this basis, the research framework for such kind of problems is put forward.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.050

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.170
GPT teacher head0.427
Teacher spread0.257 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Sustainable DevelopmentSame topicDiverse Aspects of Tourism ResearchFrench-language works237,207