MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

UNWTO World Tourism Barometer and Statistical Annex, May 2019

2019· article· en· W4256340920 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueUNWTO World Tourism Barometer · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicArctic and Russian Policy Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTourismQuarter (Canadian coin)EarningsBarometerIndex (typography)GeographyAnnual growth %Agricultural economicsBusinessEconomicsEconomyFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

International arrivals grew 4% in the first quarter of 2019 International tourist arrivals (overnight visitors) grew 4% in January-March 2019 compared to the same period last year, below the 6% average growth of the past two years. Growth was led by the Middle East (+8%) and Asia and the Pacific (+6%). Europe and Africa (both +4%) and the Americas (+3%) also recorded an increase in arrivals in this first quarter of 2019. Confidence in global tourism performance has started to pick up again after slowing down at the end of 2018, according to the latest UNWTO Confidence Index survey. The Panel’s outlook for the current May-August period is more optimistic than in the past three periods and more than half of respondents are expecting a better performance in the coming four months. Total exports from international tourism reach USD 1.7 trillion in 2018 Total export earnings from international tourism reached USD 1.7 trillion in 2018, or almost USD 5 billion a day on average. International tourism (travel and passenger transport) accounts for 29% of the world’s services exports and 7% of overall exports of goods and services. For the seventh year in a row, growth in tourism exports (+4%) was higher than growth in merchandise exports (+3%) in 2018.

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)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.092
Threshold uncertainty score0.182

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0500.036

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.279 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreDataset

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

Citations20
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUNWTO World Tourism BarometerSame topicArctic and Russian Policy StudiesFrench-language works237,207