MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2171674939 · doi:10.5539/ass.v7n3p54

An Empirical Analysis of Influential Factors in International Tourism Income in Sichuan Province

2011· article· en· W2171674939 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Qizhi Yang, Ye Feng, Fuhui Yan

Bibliographic record

VenueAsian Social Science · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicRegional Economic and Spatial Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTourismBeijingBusinessEconomic growthGeographyChinaEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sichuan Province is abundant in tourism resources, a big tourism province. Its tourism income occupies a relatively great rate in the total output value of local area. However, an analysis of the tourism income structure of Sichuan Province, it is found that whether in terms of the total output or the proportion it occupies, the international tourism income lags behind domestic tourism income. In the meanwhile, whether compared with such cosmopolis as Beijing and Shanghai or compared with Jiangsu and Shandong, the international tourism income of Sichuan Province occupies a small rate, which is out of line with the status of big tourism province of Sichuan Province. However, as a primary means for foreign exchange earning in Sichuan Province, the international tourism income has a significance that can not be ignored. Thus, it is necessary to analyze the influential factors that affect the international tourism income of Sichuan Province, take relevant measures to improve the international tourism condition in Sichuan Province, improve the international tourism income and make greater contributions to economic development of foreign exchange earning in Sichuan Province.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.221
Threshold uncertainty score0.440

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.238 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations4
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAsian Social ScienceSame topicRegional Economic and Spatial AnalysisFrench-language works237,207