Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper analyzes the strengths and existing problems in the development of China rural tourism, putting forward some main countermeasures in many areas: strengthening layout and industrial management; promoting the cultural taste of rural tourism products and how to improve the construction and management level of this industry. Additionally, it is discussed in which way that exerts the government’s roles to push up corporately the development of rural tourism industry and living conditions of local people. Key words: China, Rural tourism, Strengths, problems, countermeasure Resume: L’article present analyse les points forts et les problemes existant dans le developpement du tourisme rural de Chine et propose des contre-mesures dans bien des domaines : le renforcement de l’arrangment et du management industriel, la promotion des produits culturels du tourisme rural et l’amelioration du niveau de construction et de management de cette industrie. En plus, l’auteur discute de quelle maniere le gouvernement joue son role pour favoriser le developpement du tourisme rural et ameliorer les conditions de vie de la population locale. Mots-Cles: Chine, tourisme rural, points forts, problemes, contre-mesure
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".