Calculation and Comprehensive Evaluation of China’s Tourism High-Quality Development Level and Regional Differences and Dynamic Evolution Based on Entropy Weight Method and TOPSIS Modeling
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Achieving high-quality development has become the core essence of tourism industrialization, and is also a necessary step for the construction of ecological civilization to make new achievements.The article establishes the index system of China's tourism high-quality development, and uses the entropy weight-TOPSIS model to measure the tourism high-quality development of China's tourism in each region from 2013 to 2021.On this basis, it comprehensively applies density estimation, Dagum Gini coefficient and convergence modeling methods to analyze the regional differences and convergence of China's tourism development.The study shows that the level of high-quality development of China's tourism industry is gradually rising, and the regional differences in high-quality development of tourism are generally narrowing, with insignificant changes in intra-regional differences and narrowing of inter-regional differences, though.The overall trend of wave height in the central region is increasing, the wave height in the western region is decreasing and the width is increasing, and the wave height in the northeast region is increasing and the width range is decreasing.At the same time, convergence coefficient shows that the gap between the level of high-quality development of tourism economy in the eastern, central and northeastern regions shows a trend of convergence, while the western region increases from 0.373 in 2012 to 0.388 in 2021, that there is no trend of convergence.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".