Assessment of the Attractiveness of Sacred Tourism
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
The article presents the experience of scoring sacred objects, the most promising for the purposes of development of sacred tourism in the territory of Almaty region of Kazakhstan. These objects were the object of research, and the subject was the methodology of integrated assessment of these objects in order to determine the most priority and promising centers of sacred tourism in the studied territory. The research purpose is to determine the tourist attractiveness of sacred objects of Almaty region. The level of tourist attractiveness of sacred objects of Almaty region was assessed using the method of expert assessments. The tourist attractiveness of the studied objects was estimated in points by 3 groups (suitability, accessibility, significance) and by 6 indicators. 14 most attractive sacred objects for tourists of Almaty region were allocated. The obtained results allow the parties interested in the development of sacred tourism to concentrate their efforts on developing the most attractive sacred objects for tourists.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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