Discussion on the Sustainable Development of Scenic Spots
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As a theoretical concept, sustainable development contains quite rich connotation, whose ideas have been raised to kind of philosophical level, i.e. the contemporary ethical view. As such, the concept could infiltrate through the human consciousness and ideas, and could instruct people to conduct thinking and activity. Through analysis on the existing problems of the scenic spots, the thesis put forward the idea that scenic spots should insist on taking the road of sustainable development. Besides deeply analyzing the theoretical origin of sustainable development, the thesis also gave the countermeasures on the sustainable development of scenic spots on basis of the theoretical requirements from the sustainable development. Key Words: sustainable development, theoretical basis, development strategy Resume: Comme un concept theorique, le Developpement stable comprend la connotation d’enrichissement stable dont les idees se sont elevees a un niveau philosophque, i.e. vue ethique de la contemporaine. Donc, le concept peut infiltrer a travers la conscience humaine et des idees, et peut instruire les gens a inspirer leurs pensees et activites. A travers l’analyse sur les problemes existants des endroits pittoresques, la these a fait une presentation que des endroits pittoresques doivent insister sur un acheminement du developpement stable. En plus d’une analyse appronfondie de l’origine theorique du developpement stable, la these citait aussi des mesures sur le developpement stable des endroits pittoresques sur la base des demandes theoriques du developpement stable. Mots cles: developpement stable, base theorique, strategie du developpement
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".