MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2883102308 · doi:10.21625/archive.v2i2.243

Destination Studies – An Institution

2018· article· en· W2883102308 on OpenAlexaff
Sayak Ghosh

Bibliographic record

VenueARCHive-SR · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDiverse Aspects of Tourism Research
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTourismSubject (documents)DestinationsBeautyTourism geographyMarketingPolitical sciencePublic relationsSociologyBusinessComputer scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

First of all, we must understand that there are various aspects of tourism with respect to its beauty, aesthetics, technical parameters, trade & commerce, training & education, innovation etc. If anyone wants to find the bondage between education and tourism, there can be various topics, concepts, factors, and parameters to portray the entity. Again, if Education is an aspect of tourism, then we can formulate a tourism course subject to beauty, aesthetics, technical parameters, trade & commerce, innovation and, last but not the least, the destinations – The prime capital for tourism; as a tourist has a destination whereas a traveler does not. So, pertaining to education and tourism, I shall focus on destination studies.It would be better to admit that tourism is the most special segment of human geography. This subject leads us to understand our planet and the culture of the world better than any other subject. So, we must also find a scientific way of studying tourism to understand the human race better. To start with, we must focus on the different destinations of the world, their geography – how to reach there, their culture, their heritage, their history, their socio-economy, interesting places to visit there etc. Once we grab it we have almost grabbed the major portion of the subject named tourism. So, let’s proceed.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.393
Threshold uncertainty score0.740

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.114
GPT teacher head0.422
Teacher spread0.308 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueARCHive-SRSame topicDiverse Aspects of Tourism ResearchFrench-language works237,207