MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392384019 · doi:10.1007/s12371-024-00936-y

Unveiling the Legacy of the Nineteenth Century Riotinto Mining Railway: From Historic Heritage to Thriving Tourist Attraction

2024· article· en· W4392384019 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Carlos Boente, A. Delgado-Domínguez, Carlos Sierra

Bibliographic record

VenueGeoheritage · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicCultural Heritage Management and Preservation
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersRio TintoUniversidad Politécnica de Madrid
KeywordsTourismThrivingHeritage tourismPort (circuit theory)Cultural heritageArchaeologyTourist attractionEnvironmental planningHistoryEngineeringGeographySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The Riotinto mining railway is a remarkable construction. Stretching an impressive 348 km it was built between 1873 and 1875 to transport minerals from Riotinto’s mining operations to the international port of Huelva. At its height in the 1950’s, this monumental railway network had a fleet of 162 locomotives (mostly steam but also diesel and electric) and around 3,300 freight cars and carriages. Towards the end of the 1960’s the line began to fall into disuse, and it was closed entirely in 1984. Since the establishment of the Rio Tinto Foundation in 1987, dedicated efforts have been made to preserve this invaluable railway heritage and today, the fruits of their labor can be enjoyed at the Riotinto Mining Park where tourists can ride a fully restored 22 km section of this historic rail network. The park is highly successful and has recovered strongly after the COVID-19 pandemic attracting a record 96,935 visitors in 2022. The majority of the park’s tourists are from Spain but also a significant number are international (principally from Germany) highlighting the global importance of this site and the railway as a sustainable heritage tourism destination. Taking the restoration of the Riotinto mining railway as a case study, we aim to demonstrate the transformative power of the preservation and restoration of industrial heritage.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.064

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.175 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations8
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeoheritageSame topicCultural Heritage Management and PreservationFrench-language works237,207