Financial Performance-Based Clustering of Spa Enterprises in Slovakia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents a cluster analysis of 20 spa enterprises operating in Slovakia, based on key financial indicators for the years 2018 and 2023. A comparative time-based approach was adopted to capture changes in financial performance over time. The primary objective is to group the spas into homogeneous clusters to better understand their financial performance and strategic positioning. Ten financial indicators were selected across five dimensions: profitability (return on assets, return on sales), efficiency (assets turnover), cost efficiency (personnel cost ratio, cost-to-sales ratio, return on costs), liquidity (net working capital, current ratio), and indebtedness (equity to total liabilities ratio, debt ratio). Hierarchical cluster analysis—a widely used statistical method in unsupervised machine learning and a foundational technique in artificial intelligence—was employed, serving as a robust tool for data-driven decision making. The analysis identified distinct clusters of spas with similar financial characteristics. The results reveal meaningful segmentation that can inform resource allocation, performance benchmarking, and strategic planning. The findings provide spa managers, investors, and policy makers with a clearer understanding of financial patterns in the Slovak spa sector and offer practical implications for enhancing competitiveness and operational effectiveness.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".