Enhancing Safety and Security: Facilities for Wheelchair Users in Marine Tourism Area
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Indonesian tourist resort of Labuan Bajo is recognized for marine and island features.Accessibility issues may cause disappointment for those using wheelchairs.This study proposes wheelchair-accessible outdoor tourism at Padar Island, Pink Beach, and the Komodo Conservation Forest to address these issues.The Pinishi boat cruise was evaluated for one day to understand accessibility issues and potential for passengers with impairments.Travel access problems for those using wheelchairs were addressed through surveys and literature.Surveys were conducted with 15 participants from diverse backgrounds and over 30 scholarly articles were reviewed to gather insights on the topic.Data from both approaches was examined using descriptive statistics, content analysis, and SWOT analysis.It was found that the Pinishi boat needs redesigning to accommodate wheelchair access on board.An additional portable crane was used to assist travel from the boat to the ground and back.Accommodations for wheelchair trailriders were needed to cross the wilderness of Komodo Island, ascend the mountains of Padar Island, and enjoy Pink Beach.The study recommended more accessible transportation and accommodation, ramps, paths, or trails at attractions, accessible facilities or services at attractions, a website or app with comprehensive and up-to-date information on wheelchair-accessible Labuan Bajo, and brochures, maps, or guides with relevant and reliable information.The proposed solutions could enhance accessibility, quality, safety, and satisfaction for those using wheelchairs in Labuan Bajo, while supporting universal design and disability rights.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".