Insights on Wine Connoisseurs for the Wine Tourism Industry
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
This article suggests that studying wine culture may help to further understand wine tourism. The broader culture of wine consumption has an influence on the motivation and interest that people have for visiting a wine region or a winery. This study takes an anthropological approach to wine consumption culture and identifies specific topics of interest that connoisseurs find in wine and that may be relevant to wine tourism. The study is based on fieldwork and interviews with wine connoisseurs from Montreal (Canada). It identifies four main dimensions through which people engage with wine. The first factor concerns the formal discoveries offered by wine, the second, its social and cultural significance, the third, its producers and their values, and the fourth, the experimentation of theoretical knowledge in the context of wine regions. Each of these four dimensions offers a means for better understanding the visitor experience at wineries.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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