MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Strategi Pengembangan Pariwisata Kawasan Geopark Meratus Provinsi Kalimantan Selatan, Studi Kasus: Kecamatan Piani Kabupaten Tapin

2025· article· en· W4408088184 on OpenAlexaff
Riry Magriaty

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Regional and Rural Development Planning · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCommunity-based Tourism Development and Sustainability
Canadian institutionsEncana (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeoparkGeographyEnvironmental protectionTourismArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Tourism has an important role in regional development. Tapin Regency in particular is part of the Meratus geopark because it is traversed by the Meratus mountainous landscape with geosites spread across parts of Piani District. This research examines the strategies and potential of new tourist destinations in the Meratus geopark lanskap. The results of the study show that the community supports tourism development in the Meratus Geopark area, especially if it is developed and focused on Piani District. Supported tourism is the organization of cultural events and the development of tourist attractions along the Meratus geopark route in Piani District. Nine new tourist locations were found that have the potential to become new tourist destinations in the region. In order for the Meratus geopark to be sustainable, the Regional Government must prioritize building access roads to tourist attractions, growing micro, small and medium enterprises and creating local specialty products, as well as increasing tourism cooperation with CSR. This strategy will have an impact on regional development, in the main to accelerate the development of the Meratus Geopark, Piani District, as a connecting route between strategic tourism areas.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

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 studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.294 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Regional and Rural Development PlanningSame topicCommunity-based Tourism Development and SustainabilityFrench-language works237,207