Bibliographic record
Abstract
To investigate the perception and preference of foreign visitors to Korean traditional foods, 206 visitors(male 142, female 61) were surveyed with questionnaires translating in English, Chinese and Japanese. Subjects had various nationality such as China(77.4%), America(20.9%), Japan(16.0%), Canada(6.5%), Southeast Asia(2.5%) and Europe(2.5%). The 70.2% of the respondents had been tried Korean dishes before visiting Korea on the recommendation of friends or acquaintances(59.9%) or by the advertisement, articles, and travel agency. Bulgogi and Kimchi were the most popular menu that they had been tried in their country and Bibimbop, Kalbi, Korean dumpling, Samgaetang and Chapchae were following. 29.8% of the respondents had never tried Korean dishes because of they didn't have a chance to try(43.1%) or there were no Korean restaurant near their place(25.5%) or they had no interest in Korean dishes(23.5%). As expected, Kimchi and Bulgogi were well known food, showing rank of highest recognition. Chun and Dduck were the dishes that they had heard or saw but not eaten and Goojeolpan and Shinsunro were the dishes that they had not heard or saw. Preference to Korean dishes shows the same tendency as perception, Bulgogi, Bibimbop, Kalbi and Kimchi were the highly preferred group and Samgaetang, Bindaedduck, Chapchae, Dumpling and Raengmyon were mildly preferred one and Cucumber Kimchi, Kalbitang, Chun, Namul, Dduck were lower group of preference and Shinsunro and Goojeolpan were rarely preferred. These result shows that it is needed to advertise Korean dishes and to make events for globalization of Korean food.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".