Progress Report: The Center at Fifteen
Bibliographic record
Abstract
[Excerpt] The Center for Hospitality Research, publisher of this journal, is celebrating its fifteenth anniversary this year. Though we will note this occasion at the Cornell Hotel Society’s annual New York Hotel Show Reception, I wanted to offer a progress report to the readers who cannot be in New York in November. The Center began in 1992 when a young professor, Steve Carvell, now the Hotel School’s associate dean, brought the idea to the faculty. After the initial angst associated with all new ideas, the faculty agreed to endorse the idea and selected Professor Jack Corgel as the Center’s first director. Jack got the Center going by bringing in a number of partners and organizing a conference. After Jack stepped down in 1994, however, the Center struggled. By 2000 the Center had no partners, no conferences, and no research.\nProfessor Cathy Enz took over the Center in fall 2000. With a goal of revitalizing the Center, she hired a small staff, including our director of corporate relations Joe Strodel, created an advisory board, began bringing in partners and data providers, developed the concept of Cornell Hospitality Reports, began funding summer research fellows, and began sponsoring the Center’s roundtables. In addition, under Cathy’s leadership the Center engaged Sage Publications to manage this journal, which we have just renamed the Cornell Hospitality Quarterly (CQ). Since Sage became our journal manager, CQ has increased its readership, decreased its acceptance rate (due to a stronger field of article submissions), and is now listed in the Thompson Scientific Journal Citation Index (as explained elsewhere in this issue by editor Linda Canina).
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 | 0.007 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.014 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.364 | 0.230 |
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".