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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Previous research has suggested that tourism has been slow in responding to knowledge management strategies in its planning, management and development practices and, as a result, there has been limited research in this field pertaining to knowledge management. In this conceptual discussion, knowledge management (hereafter KM) is broadly used as a term to refer to any planned and controlled application of knowledge for achieving goals and missions in tourism planning, management and development. The purpose of this research is twofold. First, the article presents a review of previous research and conceptual frameworks from the sociology of knowledge and KM that are potentially applicable to tourism. Second, it proposes a research agenda to address KM in tourism from five perspectives. The discussion encompasses issues such as tourism knowledge and tourism sectors, the structure and process of KM, and the role of information and communication technology in facilitating knowledge-based strategies. Implications for future inquiries are also discussed from these distinct perspectives.
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 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 | 0.005 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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 it