MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6968470898 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.15607140

Gaia-X Tourism Ecosystem's White Paper on Data Governance for Tourism Governance

2025· article· en· W6968470898 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDigital Marketing and Social Media
Canadian institutionsPricewaterhouseCoopers (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTourismWhite paperCorporate governanceContext (archaeology)Data governanceDecentralizationTourism geographyWork (physics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper is a joint publication of the Gaia-X Tourism Ecosystem and the Gaia-X Association (AISBL).It reflects the collaborative work of stakeholders committed to building a trusted, interoperable, and sovereignEuropean Tourism Data Space. In today’s rapidly evolving world, the European tourism industry stands at a crossroads. With informationbeing pivotal in driving decisions and strategies, based on the access of (high quality) data, the necessityfor a robust data governance framework has reached an inflection point. As travel dynamics and consumerbehaviours change swiftly, the tourism sector must adapt its governance to benefit everyone involved—from local businesses to international companies, including the public sector.This white paper explores how effective data management can strengthen tourism across Europe. Startingfrom the vision offered by the European Data Strategy and drawing insights from the Gaia-X initiative, itexplores concepts of digital sovereignty and decentralization in the context of the European tourism dataspaces.In the context of this document, Data Spaces concepts are aligned with the definitions of the Data SpacesSupport Centre (DSSC)

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)0.021
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.113

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0210.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0050.007
Scholarly communication0.0240.015
Open science0.0020.012
Research integrity0.0120.010
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.003

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.250 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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 venueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)→Same topicDigital Marketing and Social Media→French-language works237,207→