Від півночі до півдня: екологічні переваги резортів Північної Америки
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The article promotes hotels and resorts that offer eco-initiatives. The experience of eco-oriented institutions in North America is considered, in particular, certification of construction according to international standards, safe materials in the interior and exterior, the use of secondary raw materials, energy saving, and leisure associated with interaction with nature is evaluated. The aim of the work is to determine typical eco-initiatives for resorts under consideration in the region, as well as to evaluate these initiatives and the overall impression of guests' stay in hotels and resorts. In particular, service, nature, leisure, rooms and exterior were evaluated. The frequency of positive customer reviews was calculated according to the specified criteria. It is determined that service has become an important and frequently mentioned criterion. An important criterion in choosing a resort is proximity to nature, for example, to a lake, forest, mountains. Having visited such places, guests often mention outdoor activities in reviews, for example, skiing, canoeing, cycling. It does not matter whether the hotel offers such entertainment, or whether the service for the provision of such services is located near to the resorts. When evaluating rooms, a large space, the presence of sound insulation, a comfortable bed and cleanliness are often distinguished. Exterior features are rarely mentioned. The paper carried out a comparative assessment of resorts in Canada, the USA and Mexico. Their features and advantages for tourists are indicated.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.028 | 0.009 |
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".