MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2952448268 · doi:10.14430/arctic68320

The Impact of Sea Ice on Cruise Tourism on Svalbard

2019· article· en· W2952448268 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Marta Bystrowska

Bibliographic record

VenueARCTIC · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniwersytet Śląski w Katowicach
KeywordsCruiseSea iceTourismOceanographyArcticArctic ice packGeographyEnvironmental scienceClimatologyPhysical geographyGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper explores the relationship between sea ice conditions and cruise tourism activities in the Arctic Archipelago of Svalbard. It analyzes how cruise tourism planning and organization depend on sea ice conditions and to what extent Arctic climate change influences tourism. A mixed-method approach, including sea ice analysis and interviews with 13 cruise tourism stakeholders, was applied to grasp the complexity of Svalbard’s cruise tourism. The outcomes show that cruise traffic depends on the sea ice cover, but only to some extent. Other factors, such as a location’s attractiveness or sailing regulations also influence cruise itineraries around Svalbard. Sea ice conditions are in general considered favorable for cruising around Svalbard, and sea ice is a not a decisive factor in cruise planning and organization. The sea ice cover around Svalbard is decreasing; thus, high annual and inter-annual unpredictability of sea ice poses challenges for cruise operations around Svalbard. Flexibility in itineraries, plus good cooperation and management help the cruise industry adjust to any challenges arising from uncertain sea ice conditions. However, issues of overcrowding and decreased attractiveness due to disappearing ice are more and more visible and may challenge the development of cruise tourism around Svalbard in the future.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.125
Threshold uncertainty score0.249

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 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

Citations24
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueARCTICSame topicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamicsFrench-language works237,207