Bibliographic record
Abstract
Culinary experiences have long been an important aspect of tourism. For many destinations, culinary offerings have become ubiquitous with the place—pasta in Italy, wine in the Loire Valley or Napa Valley, or curry in India. As tourists increasingly seek out authentic touristic experiences, including culinary experiences, the question arises regarding what constitutes an authentic culinary experience in a place. While authentic and authenticity are terms widely used in the tourism literature, a precise definition of what those terms mean and a method for identifying that which is authentic remains elusive. Research regarding authenticity in tourism suggests that locals occupy a "place of privilege" with respect to determining the authenticity of a touristic experience because of their connection to and context in relation to the place. This article examines the perspectives of Prince Edward Island (PEI) residents with respect to what constitutes an authentic culinary touristic experience in which visitors to Canada's smallest province can partake and that provide those visitors with a glimpse of what life in PEI is or was really like, and provides a voice for an underrepresented group in the authenticity discourse. Results show that authentic culinary experiences transcend food, and encompass people, places, and experiences in ways that enrich touristic endeavors. Locals understand and interpret authenticity in ways that both conform to and differ from existing scholarly work related to tourism authenticity, and span objective, existential, and constructive authenticity.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.014 | 0.015 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".