L’innovation au cœur de la diversification touristique des stations de montagne ?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Le contexte d’évolution et d’incertitudes fort qui touche les stations de montagne, en termes de climat, de demande touristique et sportive, ou encore de concurrence entre stations, les conduit à recourir de plus en plus à l’innovation pour renouveler leur trajectoire de développement. Dans ce cadre, les acteurs, publics et privés, des stations de montagne conçoivent puis utilisent des innovations sportives (sur les plans des techniques, des savoir-faire ou de l’organisation sociale) en les inscrivant dans de nouvelles stratégies de diversification du tourisme. Plus spécifiquement, l’objectif poursuivi dans cet article vise, d’une part, à comprendre l’émergence des infrastructures du trail, en tant qu’innovation sportive, dans les territoires touristiques suisses et, d’autre part, à discuter du rôle innovant, ou non, du trail dans les processus de diversification du tourisme en montagne.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".