MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2292137073 · doi:10.29244/jitl.16.1.31-37

ARAHAN DAN STRATEGI PENGEMBANGAN LAHAN SAWAH DI WILAYAH PESISIR PROVINSI KALIMANTAN BARAT

2014· article· id· W2292137073 on OpenAlexaff
Yustian Yustian, Untung Sudadi, Muhammad Ardiansyah

Bibliographic record

VenueJurnal Ilmu Tanah dan Lingkungan · 2014
Typearticle
Languageid
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgriculture and Agroindustry Studies
Canadian institutionsEncana (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsForestryGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Wilayah Pengembangan (WP) Pesisir merupakan sentra produksi beras bahkan penyuplai untuk tiga WP lainnya di Provinsi Kalimantan Barat. Pada tahun 2015, penduduk di WP Pesisir diperkirakan 2.29 juta jiwa. Bila terjadi konversi lahan basah 30,000 ha tahun-1 dan tanpa penambahan luas lahan baku sawah, ada indikasi berkurangnya suplai beras diluar WP Pesisir dan tahun 2016 bahkan mengalami defisit beras. Oleh karena itu, diperlukan arahan yang komprehensif dan strategi untuk pengembangan sawah sawah. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk: (1) mengidentifikasi lahan potensial, (2) menentukan keunggulan komparatif dan kompetitif, (3) menentukan tipologi lahan dan klaster, dan (4) menyusun arah secara spasial dan strategi untuk pengembangan sawah lahan basah di WP Pesisir. Hasil analisis spasial diperoleh luasan lahan potensial 411,950 ha untuk pengembangan padi sawah dari 5,664,580 ha luas total WP Pesisir. Berdasarkan analisis LQ dan SSA ada lima dari tujuh kabupaten/kota sebagai wilayah basis pertanian padi, sedangkan analisis tipologi membentuk tiga klaster wilayah. Keseluruhan hasil analisis menunjukkan bahwa Kabupaten Sambas dan Kabupaten Kubu Raya adalah Kabupaten yang paling besar luas lahan potensialnya disusul oleh Kota, merupakan wilayah basis unggulan dan aktivitas pertaniannya yang sudah berkembang sehingga paling diprioritaskan untuk pengembangan kawasan padi sawah.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.076

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0230.004

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.204 · 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

Citations6
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJurnal Ilmu Tanah dan LingkunganSame topicAgriculture and Agroindustry StudiesFrench-language works237,207