Exploring the Impact of Pandemic Measures on Airport Performance
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The impact of COVID-19 measures on airport performance is obvious, and there have been numerous studies on this topic. However, most of these studies discuss prevention measures, the effects on airport operations, forecasts of economic impacts, changes in service quality, etc. There is a lack of research on the effects of various prevention measures on airport operations and the interrelationships between these measures. This study focuses on addressing this gap. In this study, an integrated approach is devised that combines the decision-making trial and evaluation laboratory (DEMATEL) method and interpretive structural modeling (ISM). This integrated method is useful for exploring the relationship between pandemic measures and airport performance as well as the complex relationship between them, and the combination of methods improves upon the shortcomings of the original models. This study reveals that mandating vaccination certificates for entry into a country is the most significant measure affecting airport performance. Additionally, aircraft movement at the airport has the greatest overall impact and can be considered the most crucial factor influencing airport performance from an operational standpoint. The findings show that both factors directly influence financial performance, as reflected in the net income. Some management implications are provided to mitigate the consequences of the measures taken to counter the pandemic crisis. This integrated approach should also assist authorities and policy-makers in planning cautious action for future crises.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it