The Quality of Life and Human Development Index of Community Living along Pahang and Muar Rivers: A Case of Communities in Pekan, Bahau and Muar
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Rivers have something to do with the improvement of the quality of life of the rural community. A lot of benefits can be offered to the river community. This study intends to reveal the level of quality of life of the rural community living along two major rivers in Malaysia, the Pahang and Muar Rivers. Apart from this, this study intends to investigate the level of Human Development Index of the Pahang and Muar River community by using an established human development index known as the Well-o-Meter. This is a quantitative study, where a total of 900 respondents had been selected. A developed questionnaire was used and survey was employed. Based on the results gained, it can be identified that the respondents studied recorded a high level of mean score in the aspects of social involvement and relationship, home condition, safety at the areas and education. The human development index employed have detected that the respondents studied do have a low level of HDI. The findings of the study were further discussed.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".