Beyond Management and Sustainability: Visitor Experiences of Physical Accessibility in the Great Smoky Mountains National Park, USA
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The National Center on Accessibility sponsored this study to identify the perceptions and attitudes of people with physical disabilities toward their experiences related to physical accessibility in the Great Smoky Mountains National Park. A total of 300 questionnaires were distributed to individuals with disabilities onsite. Of these questionnaires, 122 completed and usable questionnaires were collected. The physical accessibility problems in the park identified by visitors with physical disabilities were lack of the width of doorways in restrooms, followed by lack of accessible trails, lack of grab bars in restrooms, and lack of curb cuts. The uniqueness of this project is that it represents the first time focusing on the perceptions and expectations of visitors with physical disabilities regarding the accessibility in an individual national park. In order to further understand accessibility in the US National Park Service, future research may consider collecting these patterns and attitudes from people with and without different disabilities (such as physical disabilities, hearing impairment, visual impairment) at various national park units (national parks, national historical sites, national parkways, and national monuments) at the state, regional, and national levels.
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 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 | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".