MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7128542683 · doi:10.64903/1480-6800-28.2.126

Evaluation of the Tourism Climate in M’Sila Province Using the Tourism Climate Index (TCI)

2025· article· W7128542683 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Toumia Amrouche

Bibliographic record

VenueArab world geographer · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicUrban Heat Island Mitigation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTourismIndex (typography)Climate changePrecipitationAridity indexSunshine durationGlobal warming

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Climatic factors constitute one of the most important elements of tourist attraction and a vital natural resource for any tourist destination. Many studies in applied climatology link the degree of influence of climatic characteristics with tourism, highlighting the term “climatic comfort” as one of the most essential conditions for attracting tourists. This study aims to evaluate the tourism climate of M’Sila Province using the Tourism Climate Index (TCI) developed by Mieczkowski in 1985, which is considered one of the significant indicators applied to many regions worldwide to assess the impact of climate on tourism attraction. The index relies on various climatic variables, including daytime comfort index (CID), daily comfort index (CIA), precipitation index (R), sunshine duration index (S), and the wind speed index (W), to formulate the mathematical equation with specific standardized weights and proportions. The equation of this index was applied to all months of the year to identify the most climatically suitable tourism months in M’Sila Province, based on climatic data from the two meteorological stations (M’Sila and Bousaada) for the period from 1991 to 2023. The results of the Tourism Climate Index (TCI) evaluation for M’Sila Province indicate a range from acceptable to excellent, with evaluation scores ranging between 56.2 and 82.4. These results are considered favorable and contribute to attracting tourists throughout most of the year. For the M’Sila station, the results showed an excellent tourism climate in April and October, a very good tourism climate in March, May, September, and November, and a good tourism climate in January, February, June, July, August, and December. The acceptable tourism climate was recorded in August. For the Bousaada station, the results were similar to those of the M’Sila station but consisted of only three categories of tourism climate. A very good tourism climate was observed in March, April, May, September, October, and November, a good tourism climate in January, February, June, and December, and an acceptable tourism climate in July and August. The study concluded that M’Sila Province enjoys an attractive tourism climate during most months of the year, making it a significant tourism hub that combines various types of tourism due to its diverse and abundant tourism potential. Consequently, the study recommended enhancing and rehabilitating all tourism resources in the province, with greater focus on maintaining and expanding green spaces.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.053
Threshold uncertainty score0.105

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.249 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArab world geographerSame topicUrban Heat Island MitigationFrench-language works237,207