New pattern of air market according to liberalization air transport between Korea and China
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Air Transportation industry becomes more competitive that the restriction on new access to market were eased and relaxed. Liberalization of international air transport will continue, via bilateral and multilateral process. Korea, Japan, and China have expanded enormously the economic trade and cultural exchange bilaterally in the Northeast Asia, they are acknowledging the importance and necessity of improved connection, it order to face effectively other regional blocks of US-Canada, NAFTA, ASEAN, CLMV. In particular, nobody denies that it is urgent to liberalize bilaterally the air transport in Northeast Asia for promoting reciprocal benefits and prosperity. Recently while open skies bilateral agreements was signed between Korea-China in June, 2006. The agreements processes are too heavily influenced by flag carriers; leading to capacity/market sharing between the bilateral carriers in most markets, against the interest of consumers and overall economic interest of the nation. For successful operation of Northeast Air Market, it is need to set up development strategy paradigm by creating cross-border sub-regional (Northeast Asian) open skies bloc as well as preparing and creating of LCCs operations.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".