MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405334713 · doi:10.1051/shsconf/202420804026

Post-Pandemic Risk Management Strategies in the Aviation Industry: Case study of HNA Group & Aegean Airlines

2024· article· en· W4405334713 on OpenAlexaff
Kai Cao, Wentao Zhao

Bibliographic record

VenueSHS Web of Conferences · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicCOVID-19 Pandemic Impacts
Canadian institutionsThe Scarborough Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAviationBusinessPandemicRisk managementCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Environmental planningGeographyEngineeringFinanceMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As the global economy gradually recovers from the impact of COVID-19, the aviation industry is also ushering in long-awaited development opportunities. However, the challenges facing the post-pandemic aviation industry should not be ignored, including increased market competition, an uncertain global economic environment, frequent policy adjustments, regional conflicts, and external risks. This study analyzed the risk management practices of Hainan Airlines Group and Aegean Airlines, among other typical cases, to explore how airlines can strengthen risk management during the post-pandemic recovery period. This study analyzed the risks faced by airlines during the recovery process and their causes from multiple dimensions, such as market demand forecasting, cost control, operational efficiency improvement, external environment analysis, and safety management, and put forward corresponding management suggestions and strategies. Through systematic analysis and research, this study aims to provide a useful reference for airlines’ risk management in the post-epidemic era and help airlines achieve stability and sustainable development in a complex and ever-changing market environment.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.041

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.238 · 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 designCase report
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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSHS Web of ConferencesSame topicCOVID-19 Pandemic ImpactsFrench-language works237,207