MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4233628480 · doi:10.1504/ijbda.2019.104162

A systematic review of the civilian airline industry: towards a general model of customer loyalty

2019· review· en· W4233628480 on OpenAlexaff
Alencar Bravo, Darli Rodrigues Vieira

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Business and Data Analytics · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicAviation Industry Analysis and Trends
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Trois-Rivières
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLoyaltyLoyalty business modelGlobeAir transportBusinessTransportation industryMarketingBusiness modelAviationSystematic reviewComputer scienceTransport engineeringEngineeringPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Air transportation is an increasingly significant activity across the globe, and the industry is expected to grow, particularly with respect to civilian transportation. The issue of how companies can attract client loyalty in the face of the expected increase in airline routes is of particular interest. However, civilian air transportation is very diverse (e.g., in business models, areas of actuation); therefore, there is no universal model to predict loyalty that considers and encompasses the heterogeneity of civilian transportation. This paper uses a meta-analysis to solve this problem, systematically reviews the literature and collects data. Specific statistical concepts and tools are then used to interpret these data to provide generalisable results. The resulting model demonstrates meaningful relationships. The model is useful because it directs managers to concentrate their efforts on the most valuable elements needed to achieve customer loyalty and therefore sustain business.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.193
Threshold uncertainty score0.641

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.177
GPT teacher head0.351
Teacher spread0.174 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Business and Data AnalyticsSame topicAviation Industry Analysis and TrendsFrench-language works237,207