MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2979296929

ДРОБНОЕ РАЙОНИРОВАНИЕ И ПЛОЩАДНОЕ РАЗВИТИЕ ТУРИЗМА

2018· article· ru· W2979296929 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Александр Иванович Зырянов

Bibliographic record

VenueВестник Московского университета. Серия 5. География · 2018
Typearticle
Languageru
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicArctic and Russian Policy Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTourismZoningGeographyResource (disambiguation)Regional scienceEconomyEconomic geographyEnvironmental protectionPolitical scienceArchaeologyLaw
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The tourism with its widest range of resource interests acts as a counterbalance to modern tendencies of social and economic space compression. In Russian regions there is a growing interest in «areal development» of tourism, which requires higher degree of territorial organization than the «site development». Fractional zoning is a geographical tool for involving the entire region in the tourist processes, but it still has a low applied value for tourism in Russia. The provinces of Canada are the world leaders in spatial delimitation for the purpose of practical tourism. All ten provinces of Canada actively use fractional tourist zoning, basing it on different principles, however. The Canadian experience of representing provinces in tourist mosaics should be taken into the account in Russian regions. Basing on the results of our studies and the experience from the Canadian provinces it is necessary to allocate the following tourist areas in the Perm region: North Urals, Mining Urals, Preduralje, Parma, Upper Kama, Middle Kama and Lower Kama.

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)0.003
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.072

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0210.007

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.355
Teacher spread0.316 · 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
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 venueВестник Московского университета. Серия 5. География→Same topicArctic and Russian Policy Studies→French-language works237,207→