Geodiversity and Mining Towards the Development of Geotourism: A Global Perspective
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
Geodiversity and geological heritage are considered to be parallel and closely related concepts of biodiversity and biological heritage. Biodiversity is based and exists on the geodiversity of a territory. In the same way, mining activity and mining heritage are distinguished as contributing to social and economic development. The mining heritage is linked to the geological heritage and has become increasingly important for its social value and relationship with tourist activities. This study aims to analyze these fields' intellectual structure through bibliometrics as a current and innovative methodology that allows a full understanding of their structure and the relationships between these fields of cultural heritage, geodiversity, mining and geotourism. The following methodology considered: i) Search for classified information with scientific rigour in an indexed database, using search descriptors that cover the objective set, ii) analysis of scientific articles through graphical and statistical output schemes, and iii) discussion of the contributions, methodologies used, and trends on the subject. 709 documents of 29 years (1990-2019) from the Scopus database were analyzed. The results show the main themes, countries and influential institutions in cultural heritage, geodiversity, mining and tourism, which address six major research topics ranging from sustainable mining to geodiversity. Extensive information and understanding are provided that other research has partially addressed, allowing current and potential research areas to be identified.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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