MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1992347171 · doi:10.5430/ijba.v2n2p14

Forecasting Tourism Demand Using Time Series, Artificial Neural Networks and Multivariate Adaptive Regression Splines:Evidence from Taiwan

2011· article· en· W1992347171 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Chang Jui Lin, Hsueh Fang Chen, Tian Shyug Lee

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Business Administration · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDiverse Aspects of Tourism Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMultivariate adaptive regression splinesAutoregressive integrated moving averageTourismMultivariate statisticsArtificial neural networkMars Exploration ProgramComputer sciencePromotion (chess)EconometricsTime seriesRegressionDemand forecastingRegression analysisOperations researchStatisticsGeographyArtificial intelligenceBayesian multivariate linear regressionMachine learningMathematicsPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the past few decades, international tourism has grown rapidly and has become a very interesting topic in tourism research. Taiwan, acting as a citizen in the global community, improved traveling facilities, and governments’ strong promotion has drawn more and more visitors to visit Taiwan. This study tries to build the forecasting model of visitors to Taiwan using three commonly adopted ARIMA, artificial neural networks (ANNs), and multivariate adaptive regression splines (MARS). In order to evaluate the appropriateness of the proposed modeling approaches, the dataset of monthly visitors to Taiwan was used as the illustrative example. Analytic results demonstrated that ARIMA outperformed ANNs and MARS approaches in terms of RMSE, MAD, and MAPE and provided effective alternatives for forecasting tourism demand.

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)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.060
Threshold uncertainty score0.120

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.143
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.210 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations110
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Business AdministrationSame topicDiverse Aspects of Tourism ResearchFrench-language works237,207