MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1591886351

일본인과 중국인의 방한수요 결정요인 분석

2010· article· ko· W1591886351 on OpenAlex
洪美暎, 李亨龍

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

Venue관광학연구 · 2010
Typearticle
Languageko
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDiverse Topics in Contemporary Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTourismQuarter (Canadian coin)ChinaUnit rootEconomicsBusinessEconomyGeographyEconometrics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study identified the determinants of inbound tourism demand to Korea from Japan and Korea. Through a preliminary study on the decisive factors affecting the tourism demand, the GDP of origin countries and seven other dummy variables, including seasonality, World Cup, SARS, and so forth, were employed to measure their effects on the inbound tourism demand. Data used in this study were the numbers of visitors from the countries during the first quarter of 1999 to the last quarter of 2008. The unit root test was used to look at the long-term stability of the variables and OLS was employed to estimate the coefficients. Results showed that in case of Japan, GDP had little to do with the inbound tourism demand to South Korea, while other factors affected the country's tourism demand to Korea. In contrast, in case of China, GDP turned out to be the most significant factor that impact on the inbound tourism demand. Several implications of the study were also discussed.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.789
Threshold uncertainty score0.992

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0190.009

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 head0.079
GPT teacher head0.393
Teacher spread0.315 · 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