The Recreational Value of Bama in China: One of the Five World’s Longevity Townships
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The recreational value of Bama Area in China is estimated to be 2.73 hundred millions dollars in 2009 via a revisionary travel cost method (TCM) in this paper. To make the estimation more applicable to the case of Bama, one of the five top longevity townships in the world, this paper adopts a new partition method and revises two calculation principles. Firstly, the conventional zonal travel cost method is amended to divide tourists by their travel cost instead of geographical or administrative zones. Secondly, the cost of tourists for different duration in Bama is calculated respectively. For short-term tourists, travel cost is estimated with the opportunity cost coefficient 1/3. The opportunity cost of the long-term tourists is replaced by their daily board and lodging cost in Bama. Thirdly, the total recreational value only covers special visits to Bama but excludes multi-destination visits. With the three modifications, it is plausible that the recreational value of Bama estimated in this paper reflects more objectively the resource characteristics and real value of the site.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".