MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3156132366 · doi:10.17762/turcomat.v12i3.2009

When do we fly again? Managing Airlines in a Pandemic: Challenges and Recommendations

2021· article· en· W3156132366 on OpenAlexaff
Mark Loo Et. al.

Bibliographic record

VenueTürk bilgisayar ve matematik eğitimi dergisi · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicCOVID-19 Pandemic Impacts
Canadian institutionsConcordia University of Edmonton
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDistrustBusinessPandemicGovernment (linguistics)SustainabilityAviationCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Customer engagementCivil aviationResilience (materials science)MarketingPublic relationsPolitical scienceMedicineSocial mediaEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper aimed to identify the challenges and propose recommendations to manage sustainability of the airline industry in a pandemic. When the World Health Organization stated Covid-19 as pandemic on March 11, 2020, governments in all countries ordered lockdowns, imposed travel restrictions, and required quarantine of 14 days for visitors and citizens upon arrival at the airport. The airlines industry came to a standstill. As Covid-19 is a recent and evolving phenomenon, the methodology employs secondary research based on data from authoritative sources such as the World Health Organization, International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) and International Air Transport Association (IATA) to identify the challenges. Peer reviewed research on past pandemics, especially the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) in 2002-2003 help formulate recommendations to manage sustainability. The challenges are financial crisis, travel restrictions and customer distrust. The recommendations are positioning customer safety first, customer engagement, pricing strategy and collaboration with government. Limitations of the research and future research suggestions are presented

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.028
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.058

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.028
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0070.008
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0050.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.002

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 head0.086
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.202 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTürk bilgisayar ve matematik eğitimi dergisiSame topicCOVID-19 Pandemic ImpactsFrench-language works237,207