Selected Geographical and Tourist Aspects in the Assessment of the Quality and Standard of Living of Polonia in the Greater Toronto Area
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The quality of life is commonly referred to as a determinant of well-being, contentment, happiness or a sense of satisfaction with one’s own existence. Often used interchangeably with the level, conditions or standard of living. Quality of life is the satisfaction of meeting all human needs. The main aim of this research is to determine the level and quality of life in terms of tourism by the Polish community living in the Greater Toronto Area, which includes the city of Toronto and four regions: Halton, Peel, York and Durham.The article will present its own model of objective factors (standard of living) and subjective factors (life quality) interacting with each other with a particular emphasis on geographic and tourism aspects. The main aim of this article is to show how the Polish community living in the Greater Toronto Area assesses the aspects related to tourism management in the city. The results of the study will be presented on the basis of a survey questionnaire conducted on 583 respondents. The respondents assessed, among other things, whether they were satisfied with the conditions of rest and relaxation in this city, public transport and the environmental quality. Respondents were also asked to evaluate the activity of Polish travel agencies operating in the Greater Toronto Area. The study will also address matters related to improving the quality of life and tourism development in the city. As indicated by the respondents, such activities as supporting existing tourist activities, expansion of bicycle paths or increasing sports and recreational infrastructure (i.e. construction projects of swimming pools, tennis courts) are the main needs in the city, which could contribute to the higher rated aspects of Toronto related to tourism. Data will be presented showing that in the Polish community in the last twelve months their household had enough income to cover the costs related to leisure, vacations, holidays or school breaks.
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 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 | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".