MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2626192679 · doi:10.6000/1929-7092.2017.06.29

Heritage Tourism and Vibrant Life of the Baan Lao Community, Chao Phraya River, Bangkok, Thailand

2017· article· en· W2626192679 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Korakit Choomgrant, Renu Sukharomana

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Reviews on Global Economics · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSoutheast Asian Sociopolitical Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTourismSocioeconomicsGeographySociologyArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The reputations of primary and secondary tourist destinations are hierarchically created through its value to the nation. Prioritizing a conservation project and tourism development can have major differences. Values attached to a destination by inhabitants are different from those of tourists, and are often influenced by the promotional campaigns designed by authorized agencies. A primary destination is then worthy of promotion and conservation as it serves a nation's purposes economically, socially and politically, while a destination that is not corresponding in such ways is usually disregarded. Koh Kret is an established primary tourism destination for domestic visitors, though not for international visitors. However, the Baan Lao Community can be developed as a secondary tourism destination for visitors to Koh Kret. Koh Kret and Baan Lao Community in Thailand are illustrations of significance and value. By understanding the Baan Lao community's significance, value and values, it is an opportunity to develop the area as a secondary tourist destination, and help preserve the way of life of local inhabitants along the Chao Phraya River in Bangkok, Thailand.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.058
Threshold uncertainty score0.116

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.273 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations1
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Reviews on Global EconomicsSame topicSoutheast Asian Sociopolitical StudiesFrench-language works237,207