A Debrecenben élő alföldi üdülőtulajdonosok vizsgálata = Examintation of great plain holiday owners living in Debrecen
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A TAKEH 1989. évi adatai alapján a 6 alföldi megyében nyaralóval rendelkező debreceni nyaralótulajdonosok és nyaralóépületeik egyes jellemzőit vizsgáltam, összefüggést keresve ezen jellemzők és a tulajdonosok állandó lakóhelyének a lakókörnyezete között. Eredmények: A 3766 debreceni tulajdonos 52,7%-a lakótelepen, 10,8%-a pedig a belvárosban élt. Ezekben a körzetekben ezer lakosra 30-50 alföldi üdülőtulajdonos jut, míg a külső (keleti, déli, nyugati) kertes körzetekben csak 10-nél kevesebb. A Debrecenben élő 3766 alföldi nyaralótulajdonosnak az Alföld 35 településén volt nyaralója, ám az üdülőépületek 97%-a a települések negyedén, azaz 9 helyen található. A Debrecen belvárosában élő idősebb tulajdonosok a hajdúszoboszlói fürdő szomszédságában és a korábban kialakított Tisza-parti üdülőhelyeken építették fel hétvégi házaikat, míg az elsősorban lakótelepen élő fiatalabbak a megyeszékhely vagy a Debrecen környéki települések zártkertjeiben alakították ki azokat. |Based on the data of TAKEH from 1989, I examined some characteristics of Debrecen holiday home owners and their holiday buildings in 6 Great Plain counties, looking for a correlation between these characteristics and the living environment of the owners' permanent residence. Results: 52.7% of the 3,766 owners in Debrecen lived in housing estates, and 10.8% in the city center. In these districts, there are 30-50 Great Plain holiday owners per thousand inhabitants, while in the outer (eastern, southern, western) garden districts there are less than 10. The 3,766 lowland holiday home owners living in Debrecen had holiday homes in 35 settlements of the Great Plain, but 97% of the holiday buildings are in a quarter of the settlements , i.e. found in 9 places. Older owners living in the center of Debrecen built their weekend houses in the neighborhood of the Hajdúszoboszló spa and in the previously established resorts along the Tisza, while the younger ones living mainly in housing estates built them in the closed gardens of the county seat or the settlements around Debrecen.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.025 | 0.003 |
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.
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".