MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2916269999 · doi:10.5539/ach.v11n1p52

The Vernacular Landscape, Developing and Promoting Tourism in ChiangKhong District, Chiang Rai Province

2019· article· en· W2916269999 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Maneerat Pachankoo, Zhongwei Shen

Bibliographic record

VenueAsian Culture and History · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicRemote Sensing and Land Use
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersChiang Rai Rajabhat University
KeywordsVernacularTourismCultural landscapeGeographyPromotion (chess)SociologySocial sciencePolitical scienceArchaeologyArtPoliticsLiteratureLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study comes from observing and studying about the area based strategy of change in Chiangkhong to be the city that can be balanced and stable in the midst of tourism and economic development. It focuses mainly on using the vernacular landscape. The objectives of this research are (1) to study surrounding areas and the identity of the vernacular landscape in ChiangKhong, Chiang Rai province, (2) to study about the roles of the vernacular landscape that effects the present promotion and development of tourism in ChiangKhong. The methods used in this study are reviewing literatures and related researches; including observing areas to collect data about landscape according to the meaning of the vernacular landscape and information about all 7 sub-districts about the role of landscape to tourism issues, interviewing people who are related, then analyzing and give descriptive summary. The study has shown that the vernacular landscape in ChiangKhong occurred by natural and cultural factors. All factors are connected; the Mae-Khong river, varieties of ethnic groups and Buddhism are the reasons that people’s way of life, culture, tradition, and belief are influenced. Also, this caused the vernacular landscape to have a “combine” form and show the identity of “place” clearly. Bringing out the vernacular landscape to promote and support recent tourism plans can be divided into 3 categories; which includes using original assets, adapting and improving the original assets and creating new activities in forms and types of the vernacular landscape, both in hardscape and softscape.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.478
Threshold uncertainty score0.308

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.164
Teacher spread0.159 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAsian Culture and HistorySame topicRemote Sensing and Land UseFrench-language works237,207