MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409605011 · doi:10.61091/jcmcc27b-324

A Study on Cross-Cultural Analysis of Social Media Data and Leisure Travel Preference Prediction Supported by Cluster Analysis Algorithm

2025· article· en· W4409605011 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Combinatorial Mathematics and Combinatorial Computing · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDiverse Topics in Contemporary Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPreferenceCluster (spacecraft)Social mediaComputer sciencePsychologyAdvertisingStatisticsMathematicsWorld Wide WebBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, leisure tourism is taken as the entry point of the research, and the fused location key point features are added and integrated with the multidimensional features of time, location and space to construct an accurate portrait of social media tourism users.On the basis of tourism user profiles, a two-step clustering algorithm is combined to carry out cross-cultural analysis of social media data, to explore and excavate the performance of users' tourism preferences under the cross-cultural ability of social media.Meanwhile, in order to realize the prediction of leisure tourism preference, a combined model based on BP neural network and ARIMA is proposed to improve the accuracy of leisure tourism preference prediction by fully considering the linear and nonlinear laws of tourism statistics.The ARIMA-BP combination prediction model is applied to predict the leisure tourism preference in the future from 2027-2034.During the period 2027-2029, the number of leisure tourism tourists maintains a high annual growth rate of more than 15%, while the growth rate slows down after 2029, with an average annual growth rate of 4.44%.In 2033, the number of leisure tourism tourists will reach 1,691,280,000, and the leisure tourism preference of tourism users has been significantly strengthened.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.038

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.081
GPT teacher head0.386
Teacher spread0.305 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Combinatorial Mathematics and Combinatorial ComputingSame topicDiverse Topics in Contemporary ResearchFrench-language works237,207