Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Using the Niagara Peninsula Appellation as the case study, qualitative research was employed through the use of interviews conducted with wineries and industry associations, in an attempt to answer two specific questions: (1) how does the wine industry and wine tourism aid in the development of Niagara’s rural area using the integrated rural tourism (IRT) concept, and (2) how can IRT aid in rural development through direct, experiential, conservation, development, and synergistic benefits. It is apparent that the seven components of IRT provide a reasonable framework to analyse the ability of IRT to realize benefits, although that the addition of marketing and future needs/desires as components improve its explanatory power. Using the modified IRT framework, this research found that wine tourism has derived direct, experiential, conservation, and synergistic benefits, with work still to be undertaken in order to improve upon tourism’s positive impacts in Niagara and peripherally rural areas more generally in the areas of community engagement and improved industry synergy.
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.
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 | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it