MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1963111242 · doi:10.14710/pwk.v9i1.6502

Partisipasi Stakeholder dalam Pelestarian Kawasan Rindam IV/ Diponegoro Kota Magelang sebagai Kawasan Bersejarah

2013· article· id· W1963111242 on OpenAlexaff
Nanang Kurniawan

Bibliographic record

VenueJurnal Pembangunan Wilayah dan Kota · 2013
Typearticle
Languageid
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCommunity-based Tourism Development and Sustainability
Canadian institutionsEncana (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceHumanitiesArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Kawasan bersejarah yang terjaga dengan baik dapat memberikan identitas khas suatu kota,membedakannya dari kota lain, namun demikian usaha‐usaha pelestariannya terkadang mengalamikesulitan karena berbenturan dengan kegiatan‐kegiatan lain yang lebih mengarah pada pertumbuhanekonomi. Kawasan RINDAM IV/Diponegoro di Kota Magelang, Jawa Tengah merupakan suatu contohatas kondisi tersebut. Kawasan ini pada dasarnya adalah suatu markas militer aktif dan tempatpendidikan militer yang terletak di kota yang memiliki sejarah militer nasional yang panjang. Penelitianini mengkaji partisipasi pemangku kepentingan terkait yaitu TNI‐AD dan Pemerintah Kota Magelangdalam pelestarian kawasan RINDAM IV/Diponegoro di Magelang, melalui pendekatan kuantitatifmenggunakan analisis distribusi frekuensi. Analisis menunjukkan tingginya dukungan stakeholderterkait dalam pelestarian Kawasan RINDAM IV/Diponegoro sebagai benda cagar budaya denganmelaksanakan delapan tahapan manajemen aset. Masing‐masing stakeholder memberikan kontribusiyang beragam sesuai dengan kewenangan dan kemampuannya. Studi ini menemukan adanya indikasikoordinasi yang baik antara TNI‐AD dan Pemerintah Kota. Namun demikian sinergi yang lebih baikantara TNI, Pemerintah Daerah, pengelola dan pengguna kawasan bersejarah, pemerhati sertamasyarakat diperlukan untuk mendukung upaya pelestarian yang berkelanjutan dan bermanfaat bagigenerasi selanjutnya.Kata Kunci : pelestarian kawasan bersejarah, partisipasi stakeholder, kawasan militer

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 score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.069

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0210.004

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.

Opus teacher head0.028
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.237 · 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
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJurnal Pembangunan Wilayah dan KotaSame topicCommunity-based Tourism Development and SustainabilityFrench-language works237,207