MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2075595829 · doi:10.1177/0276146711406549

Shangri-La

2011· article· en· W2075595829 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Macromarketing · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDiverse Aspects of Tourism Research
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChinaMysticismHarmony (color)ParadiseGeographyState (computer science)EthnologySociologyHistoryPolitical scienceArchaeologyArtArt historyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Lost Horizon (Hilton) is a captivating novel about a remote idyllic place called Shangri-La, located somewhere in the mountains of Tibet. This fabled place is a wonderland where man and nature coexist in harmony as do several ethnic groups. It is a land of eternally young inhabitants blessed with magnificent landscapes shrouded in mysticism. The fantasy of this mythical place has fueled a search that has yielded many Shangri-Las in the Himalayas, each attempting to fulfill Hilton’s vision. Nevertheless, only one of them, the county of Zhongdian in China’s Yunnan Province, has been granted the use of Shangri-La brand name by the People’s Republic of China (PRC) State Council. In the present study, the researchers find that the reshaping of Zhongdian into the enchanted land of Shangri-La relies upon processes of sacralization, ethnitization, and exoticization. This research explores the construction and marketization of this mythical creation and its cultural, economic, social, and environmental consequences. This analysis also distinguishes the contrasting aims of Han Chinese and Western tourists when traveling to this encapsulated paradise.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.691
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.074
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.264 · 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