Pengukuran Tingkat Kepuasan Masyarakat terhadap Pelaksanaan Kebijakan Pelayanan Pemerintah
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AbstrakMasalah pelayanan pemerintah yang dilakukan oleh aparatur pemerintah saat ini belum memenuhi harapan masyarakat. Hal ini dapat diketahui dari berbagai keluhan masyarakat yang disampaikan melalui media masa dan jaringan sosial, sehingga dapat memberikan dampak buruk terhadap kewibawaan pemerintah, yang menimbulkan ketidakpercayaan masyarakat. Tujuan tulisan ini adalah membahas konsep dan pemikiran yang berkaitan dengan kepuasan masyarakat, pelayanan publik, dan cara pengukurannya yang komprehensif. Hal yang paling penting dilakukan adalah survei kepuasan masyarakat terhadap penyelenggaraan pelayanan publik secara berkelanjutan sebagai dasar kemungkinan replikasi inovasi pelayanan publik. Perbaikan pelayanan publik yang paling mendasar adalah perbaikan sistem rekrutmen aparatur pelayan publik. AbstractProblems government service conducted by government officials at this time have not met the expectations of society. It can be seen from the public complaints submitted through the mass media and social networks, so as to adversely affect government authority, which give rise to public mistrust. The purpose of this paper is to discuss the concepts and ideas related to the satisfaction of the public, public service, and a comprehensive measurement method. The most important thing to do is to survey people's satisfaction with the implementation of public services in a sustainable manner as a basis for public service innovation possible replication. Improvement of public services is the most basic repairs apparatus public servant recruitment system.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.006 |
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 it