Perceptions des touristes durant la pandémie de COVID-19 sur l’avenir du voyage
Bibliographic record
Abstract
La pandémie de COVID-19 bouleverse l’industrie du tourisme et risque de se faire sentir pendant encore plusieurs mois, voire des années. Il faudra ensuite s’en remettre le plus rapidement possible, mais encore faudra-t-il que les voyageurs soient au rendez-vous en grand nombre. Cet article présente les résultats d’une consultation auprès de voyageurs (n=1084) en début de confinement au Canada. Il semble que les voyages à proximité du domicile seront favorisés et que les voyages récréatifs ne reprendront que lorsque les conditions seront propices et que les tarifs seront concurrentiels. La littérature sur les désastres et les crises sanitaires démontre qu’il est primordial de rassurer les voyageurs quant à l’autorisation du gouvernement de voyager en toute sécurité avant même d’amorcer des campagnes publicitaires pour encourager le voyage à l’étranger. Les analyses permettent de constater que les voyageurs fréquents et les millénariaux sont les plus susceptibles de reprendre leurs habitudes de voyage.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".