What smart tourism in post-conflict cities follows a urbicide process? The role of new technologies in urban tourism in the western Balkans
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The 1990s marked the end of Yugoslavia and the height of conflict and urban destruction (Dubrovnik, Mostar, Sarajevo and later Belgrade). Bogdanovic (1993), an architect and former mayor of Belgrade, coined the neologism ‘urbicide’ to designate an enterprise of urban destruction which goes beyond the simple strategic objective of the physical destruction of the city, but that of the annihilation of memories, identities, and cultures associated with the city in question and its urbanity, that is to say, of the ‘ritualized murder of the city’. At the end of these multiple conflicts, the cities and the related tourism had to be rebuilt. Over the last twenty years, information technologies, the creation of peer-to-peer digital platforms (Booking, Airbnb, Expedia) and virtual reality for museum and heritage visits have boosted the attractiveness of the destination and tourism projects. The emergence of tourism projects based on digital and new technologies is booming in the Balkans, particularly the capitals like Belgrade or Sarajevo. By looking at different technological and digital projects for tourism purposes, we will see how local, private, transnational and citizen actors have taken up this project and if this projects contribute to the touristic destination.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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".