MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3187020326 · doi:10.4000/viatourism.6555

Tourisme et « éco-ethnicité » : les enjeux d’un soft power environnemental pour les minorités de l’Asie d’altitude (Chine, Laos, Népal)

2021· article· fr· W3187020326 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueVia Tourism Review · 2021
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSoutheast Asian Sociopolitical Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
FundersAgence Nationale de la Recherche
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceGeographyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cet article teste l'hypothèse suivante : la double image identitaire ethnique et environnementale d'un groupe – que nous appelons éco-ethnicité – peut expliquer dans une large mesure son émancipation ; ainsi, le fait d'être doté d'une éco-ethnicité significative pourrait fournir à ce groupe un soft power substantiel tiré du tourisme. Le texte s'appuie sur une recherche qualitative de terrain comparant trois études de cas en altitude au Népal (Annapurna), en Chine (Guizhou) et au Laos (Louang Namtha). La mise en tourisme locale y souligne l'ethnicité et les connaissances environnementales locales, mais à des degrés très divers. En conclusion, l’éco-ethnicité n’apparait pas comme un facteur d’émancipation économique déterminant.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.849
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0190.001

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.293 · 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