The Obstacles of Implementation of Village Allocation Fund Program in the North Konawe Southeast Sulawesi
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Provision of Village Allocation Fund is predicated on the realization of the right to hold the village of villageautonomy. This is done so that the village can grow and evolve to follow the growth coming from the villageitself based on diversity, participation, indigenous autonomy, democratization, and empowerment. RuralInstitutions have increased due to the ability of an optimal are not adequately involved in the planning processusing the Alokasi Dana Desa (ADD) village without there even through the planning process as the existingguidelines, were never involved in the implementation of ADD and also have never been involved in theevaluation of the implementation of the ADD, all plans activities and filing submitted to Badan PemberdayaanMasyarakat Desa (BPMD). This phenomenon shows that community involvement is still an obstacle. The mainbarriers associated with the management of the village administration who have not gotten the right formula incommunity involvement, especially in aspiration. That is because of the following: 1) The low level of publiceducation 2) Weak managerial ability of the village and other village institutions and 3) Failure mechanisms ofsocialization and increased capacity building by BPMD to the village.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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".