MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W37125665 · doi:10.1177/09612033231171365

Toeristische marketing in Montenegro. Theorie en praktijk.

2010· dissertation· nl· W37125665 on OpenAlexfundno aff
M. Dzambo

Bibliographic record

VenueLupus · 2010
Typedissertation
Languagenl
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicGlobal Trade and Competitiveness
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersDepartment of Medicine, University of TorontoLupus Foundation of America
KeywordsMontenegroBusiness administrationBusinessSociologyEthnology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Montenegro is sinds 2006 onafhankelijk geworden van Servië. Het land heeft ingrijpende politieke en economische ontwikkelingen meegemaakt die invloed hebben gehad op de toeristische industrie. De nieuwe staat moet een weg zien te vinden om zichzelf te vermarkten als een nieuwe aantrekkelijke destinatie. De marketing (met name branding) voor Montenegro als toeristische destinatie heeft veel aandacht gekregen in het creëren van een nieuwe identiteit. In Montenegro wordt vanuit het toeristische marketingveld veel energie gestoken in het beïnvloeden van het beeldvormingsproces. Naast de aanpak van de symbolische en ideologische context, vormt de realisatie hiervan de cruciale factor voor langdurige succes. Dit onderzoek is erop gericht om erachter te komen of de theorie en praktijk omtrent place marketing te plaatsen zijn binnen het kader van Montenegro op het gebied van toerisme. Het is een onderzoek naar het Montenegrijnse toeristisch marketingbeleid, de uitgezonden toeristische beelden en de opvattingen van de Montenegrijnse bevolking en stakeholders hieromtrent.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.201
Threshold uncertainty score0.400

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0050.008
Scholarly communication0.0100.006
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0250.001

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.215 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLupusSame topicGlobal Trade and CompetitivenessFrench-language works237,207