A Study on the Analysis of Complex Resort Use Status Through IPA
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study is intended to suggest marketing strategies for complex resort by identifying selection attributes of complex resorts from IPA as well as to identify factors of selection attributes of complex resorts recognized by users. For the study, survey was distributed to 400 complex resort users. Survey was conducted from August 1 to 31, 2019, in weekdays and weekends. Especially, survey was conducted on various age groups to well reflect opinions of complex resort users. Total 347 copies of survey were distributed, and 23 copies with incomplete answers were excluded that total 324 copies (80.1%) were used for empirical analysis. As a result of analysis, selection attributes of complex resort were derived to be seven factors of reliability, convenience, facilities, food and beverage, natural environment, employee service, and program. In addition, convenience and facilities turned out to be factors to be continuously maintained from IPA followed by natural environment as a factor to avoid excessive effort, program with low priority, and food and beverage and reliability in need of concentrated effort. According to these results, it seems that there shall various efforts to restore reliability and improve food and beverage of complex resorts.
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.
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 | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 it