MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2964760049 · doi:10.5539/mas.v13n8p57

Emirate of Abu Dhabi Brand Marketing Strategy – Travelers Welcome

2019· article· en· W2964760049 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Tuqa Mohamed AlOwais

Bibliographic record

VenueModern Applied Science · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDiverse Aspects of Tourism Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAbu dhabiMarketingBusinessGeographyArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Throughout the past century, the United Arab Emirates’ leadership realized the significant importance of initiating novel and innovative strategies to market themselves and contribute in their successful position among the global network, thus their obligation was to employ both short and long term strategies that help in the process of successful promotion, insertion and enhanced situation in the foreign market. Highlighting Abu Dhabi as the capital of the United Arab Emirates, and distinguishing it from the rest of the country, Dubai in particular, was the crucial vision of Al Sheikh Zayed Al Nahayan. Where the collaborative emirate’s leadership had the potential to mark Abu Dhabi as “the global capital city” (Abu Dhabi Urban Planning Council, 2007). This research discusses place-branding and marketing of the emirate of Abu Dhabi, where the emirate’s brand marketing strategies relies on the desert, sea, heritage and the city as key elements towards placing the capital of the United Arab Emirates on the global map, in addition to improving the reputation of the middle east in general and Abu Dhabi in specific, through presenting two study cases: Masder City and Saadiyat Island, which are viewed as vivid examples of the emirate of Abu Dhabi brand marketing strategies implementation focus.

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)0.001
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.134

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.001
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0400.009

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.283 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations3
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueModern Applied ScienceSame topicDiverse Aspects of Tourism ResearchFrench-language works237,207