MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2170300677 · doi:10.5267/j.msl.2011.12.024

A fuzzy application on MICE hosting: An Iranian case study for locating suitable areas based on P.L Indexes

2012· article· en· W2170300677 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Nazanin Tabrizi, M Taghvaei, H R Varesi

Bibliographic record

VenueManagement Science Letters · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicData Management and Algorithms
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFuzzy logicComputer scienceBusinessData miningArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Today, countries compete to gain political, economic, social and cultural advantages.In addition, cities are trying to demonstrate their predominance on local and regional levels and achieve development by using managerial science.Meetings, incentives, conventions and exhibitions tourism (MICE) hosting as a significant element of urban tourism is one of the effective methods to obtain urban development around the world.However, no specialized planning and independent investments in regard to these activities have been organized in Iran.Aiming to identify suitable areas in the northern part of Iran, the present research intends to recognize the necessary physical and location related (P.L) indexes to perform the specialized activities of MICE tourism in this region.So at first, indispensable indicators to accept special role of MICE tourism are identified and then using GIS and fuzzy method, adapted areas are assigned.The result map shows that a ribbon-like area near the Caspian Sea with two wide lands at central and western parts is a proper choice to host MICE activities in the region from the viewpoint of P.L indexes.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.049

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.256 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueManagement Science LettersSame topicData Management and AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207