STUDI TENTANG PENGAJUAN KLAIM KONSTRUKSI DARI KONTRAKTOR KE PEMILIK BANGUNAN
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Claim in construction industry is a problem leading to request of additional cost or time extensions, which can lead to a dispute between the owner and contractor. This paper discusses claims submitted by the contactor to the owner. Causes of claim, types, proposal submitted by the contractors, and dispute resolution methods are observed. This research shows that design changes and additional work by owner are the major cause of claims. The contractorsâ claim mostly is in additional costs, the proposal submitted by the contractors includes an explanation of the cause of claim, and the claim resolution method used is engineering judgment. Abstract in Bahasa Indonesia : Klaim dalam industri konstruksi merupakan masalah yang dapat mengarah kepada permohonan tambahan biaya atau tambahan waktu serta perselisihan antara pemilik bangunan dan kontraktor. Paper ini mendiskusikan klaim yang diajukan kontraktor ke pemilik bangunan, dilihat dari penyebab, bentuk, dan proses pengajuan klaim, serta metode penyelesaian perselisihan dari klaim. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa penyebab utama klaim adalah perubahan desain dan pekerjaan tambah yang dilakukan pemilik bangunan, sedangkan klaim kontraktor sering berupa penambahan biaya, proses pengajuan klaim dengan menyertakan penjelasan terhadap penyebab klaim, dan metode penyelesaian klaim yang sering digunakan oleh para pihak adalah engineering judgment
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.020 | 0.004 |
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".