MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4239045624 · doi:10.21933/j.edsc.2017.13.210

Turismo, un objeto de estudio: propuesta metodológica a partir de la mirada de los investigadores

2017· article· es· W4239045624 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Celeste Nava Jiménez, Dominic Lapointe, Marcelino Castillo Néchar

Bibliographic record

VenueEntreciencias diálogos en la Sociedad del Conocimiento · 2017
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicRegional Development and Innovation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTourismObject (grammar)ConstitutionResearch ObjectPhenomenonHumanitiesField researchField (mathematics)Regional scienceGeographySociologyPolitical scienceAnthropologyArtPhilosophyLinguisticsEpistemologyArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This research shows the result of a compilation of surveys in the field of tourism studies in Mexico, Argentina, Brazil and Canada. The main objective is the approximation of a methodology to build tourism as an object of study through the eyes of researchers in tourism, according to the process of building the objects of study in tourism and its methodological implications for the research on such phenomenon. The result of this investigation is presented accordingly to the following sections: a) Construction of the objects of study and methodology in tourism research; b) Disclosures about transdisciplinarity tourism as an object of study, c) Initial reflections to a coimplicated proposal in the constitution of tourism as an object of study.

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)0.026
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.030
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: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.140

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0260.030
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0110.010
Science and technology studies0.0050.010
Scholarly communication0.0110.008
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.310 · 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
GenreMethods

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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEntreciencias diálogos en la Sociedad del ConocimientoSame topicRegional Development and InnovationFrench-language works237,207