MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2549843978 · doi:10.29244/jitl.16.2.83-89

PERENCANAAN SEBARAN SARANA PENANGANAN SAMPAH MELALUI PENDEKATAN TIPOLOGI PERMUKIMAN DI KOTA TANGERANG

2014· article· id· W2549843978 on OpenAlexaff
Supriyatno Supriyatno, Komarsa Gandasasmita, Soekmana Soma

Bibliographic record

VenueJurnal Ilmu Tanah dan Lingkungan · 2014
Typearticle
Languageid
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWaste Management and Recycling
Canadian institutionsEncana (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsForestryGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Tangerang sebagai kota penyangga Jakarta memiliki pertumbuhan penduduk yang cukup pesat, sekitar 3 % per tahun. Seiring dengan pertumbuhan penduduk, jumlah sampah yang harus ditangani oleh pemerintah akan meningkat juga. Sebagai sumber sampah terbesar, sampah domestik dari permukiman perlu dikelola sebaik-baiknya. Dengan semangat pengelolaan sampah yang berkelanjutan perlu direncanakan jenis sarana persampahan di setiap jenis permukiman berdasarkan karakter atau perilaku orang dalam penanganan sampah rumah tangga mereka. Tujuan penelitian ini adalah mengidentifikasi tipologi permukiman di Kota Tangerang menurut karakteristik perumahan dan masyarakatnya dalam penanganan limbah domestik serta menentukan kebutuhan sarana persampahan berdasarkan prioritas pada setiap tipologinya. Dalam mengidentifikasi tipologi perumahan digunakan analisis spasial untuk menentukan karakteristik fisik dan dikombinasikan dengan analisis deskriptif untuk mengetahui karakteristik masyarakat, sedangkan untuk menentukan kebutuhan sarana persampahan yang sesuai di setiap jenis perumahan berdasarkan prioritasnya digunakan analisis AHP dan MCDM-TOPSIS. Kombinasi antara karakteristik fisik dan karakteristik masyarakat menghasilkan 12 (dua belas) tipologi permukiman, sedangkan hasil dari analisis AHP dan MCDM-TOPSIS menghasilkan 6 kelompok permukiman yang mempunyai prioritas kebutuhan sarana persampahan yang berbeda-beda berdasarkan pedoman umum 3R di kawasan permukiman

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.098

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0290.005

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.216 · 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

Citations1
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJurnal Ilmu Tanah dan LingkunganSame topicWaste Management and RecyclingFrench-language works237,207