MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2263134599 · doi:10.12962/j23373539.v4i2.10911

Tipologi Kecamatan Tertinggal di Kabupaten Lombok Tengah

2015· article· id· W2263134599 on OpenAlexaff
Baiq Septi Maulida Sa'ad, ‪Eko Budi Santoso‬

Bibliographic record

VenueJurnal Teknik ITS · 2015
Typearticle
Languageid
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic Growth and Fiscal Policies
Canadian institutionsEncana (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstrak— Kabupaten Lombok Tengah termasuk dalam kategori Kabupaten Tertinggal di Provinsi Nusa Tenggara Barat berdasarkan RPJMN tahun 2010-2014. Selain itu, terdapat kesenjangan pada beberapa Kecamatan di Kabupaten Lombok Tengah akibat pembangunan Bandara Internasional Lombok sehingga perlu dilakukan identifikasi dan upaya pengembangan terhadap kecamatan tertinggal tersebut. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menganalisis tipologi kecamatan tertinggal di Kabupaten Lombok Tengah berdasarkan aspek sosial dan ekonomi. Dalam perumusan Tipologi Kecamatan Tertinggal ini menggunakan Analisis Faktor Konfirmatori untuk menentukan faktor yang berpengaruh terhadap ketertinggalan kecamatan, analisis tipologi klassen untuk mengidentifikasi kecamatan tertinggal, dan analisis klaster untuk mentipologikan kecamatan tertinggal. Dari hasil penelitian terdapat empat faktor yang berpengaruh terhadap ketertinggalan kecamatan di Kabupaten Lombok Tengah yaitu faktor kualitas SDM, kondisi infrastruktur sosial, kondisi perekonomian dan kondisi infrastruktur ekonomi. Berdasaarkan hasil analisis tipologi Klassen, terdapat 8 kecamatan tertinggal yaitu Kecamatan Praya Barat Daya, Janapria, Kopang, Praya Tengah, Jonggat, Pringgarata, Batukliang dan Kecamatan Batukliang Utara. Kecamatan tertinggal ini terbagi menjadi 3 klaster berdasarkan aspek sosial dan 3 klaster berdasarkan aspek ekonomi yang mana setelah ditipologikan menjadi 5 tipologi berdasarkan aspek sosial dan ekonomi.

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)0.001
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 score0.069
Threshold uncertainty score0.136

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.001

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 head0.084
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.163 · 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

Citations3
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJurnal Teknik ITSSame topicEconomic Growth and Fiscal PoliciesFrench-language works237,207