MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Policy Assessment: A Case Study of Rural Tourism, Recreation and Leisure Development in Suburb of Chengdu, China

2012· article· en· W1716429726 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ge He, Minghong Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueStudies in sociology of science · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDiverse Aspects of Tourism Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRecreationPromotion (chess)TourismChinaDistribution (mathematics)BusinessRural areaEconomic growthLocal communityGeographyPolitical scienceEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this essay, we are going to illustrate the development of the rural tourism, recreation and leisure in a suburban area of Chengdu City, assess its implement and give rationales to its development. The results shows that the policy has achieved performances including Having promoted the income of local farmers, Having provided tourism, recreation and leisure for the public, Achieving the mutual promotion of industries in the area, Having improved the public facilities of the community, Having improved the conservation awareness of the community, Improved the capability of local community. While it met some issue to be solved such as Non-equal distribution of tourists, Lack of recreation facilities, Negative impacts on the community, fewer local business operators. Measures should be taken to make it better including the local community has developed; farmers get richer; the site serves the public. Key words : Policy assessment; Land use; Village tourism; Rural economy

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.094
Threshold uncertainty score0.187

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0070.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
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 head0.089
GPT teacher head0.475
Teacher spread0.386 · 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

Citations6
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStudies in sociology of scienceSame topicDiverse Aspects of Tourism ResearchFrench-language works237,207