MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7064961354

Co-Working Spaces in Alpinen Destinationen: Wie können diese touristische Angebote zu ihrem Vorteil nutzen?

2018· other· de· W7064961354 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenuereroDoc Digital Library · 2018
Typeother
Languagede
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicX-ray Spectroscopy and Fluorescence Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSpace (punctuation)Quarter (Canadian coin)State (computer science)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Die vorliegende Arbeit setzt sich mit dem Thema Co-Working und Alpiner Tourismus auseinander und wie Co-Working Spaces ein touristisches Angebot zu ihrem Vorteil nutzen können. Das Ziel ist es für den Mountain Hub Verbier eine Bestandsaufnahme der Alpinen Co-Working Spaces in der Schweiz und ihres bereits bestehenden touristischen Angebots zu erstellen. Daraus werden Handlungsempfehlungen aus touristischer Sicht erstellt, welche den Alpine Co-Working Space unterstützen sollen, saisonal schwächere Monate zu überbrücken.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.108

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0050.002
Scholarly communication0.0080.004
Open science0.0010.007
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0320.005

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.224 · 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 designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuereroDoc Digital LibrarySame topicX-ray Spectroscopy and Fluorescence AnalysisFrench-language works237,207