MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3093028260 · doi:10.3390/jrfm13100246

The Potential Use of Drones for Tourism in Crises: A Facility Location Analysis Perspective

2020· article· en· W3093028260 on OpenAlex

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of risk and financial management · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicUAV Applications and Optimization
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDroneTourismPerspective (graphical)Space (punctuation)Operations researchCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Computer scienceBusinessTransport engineeringMarketingGeographyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Considering the recent lockdowns and travel bans due to COVID-19, novel tourism strategies are necessary to face the increasing need for innovative products and services and to ensure long-term sustainable growth. This study looks into the potential use of drones in providing online virtual tours of open-space tourist attractions. To do so, a novel mixed-integer linear mathematical model is developed to optimally determine the number and location of required facilities and the number of drones assigned to each center. The model is applied to a case study of Rome by selecting six historic sites as the tourist attractions and considering several candidate locations for establishing the facilities. The results of different potential scenarios imply that the project is profitable, even if the demand for virtual tours is low.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.869
Threshold uncertainty score0.135

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.198 · 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