Pengembangan ”RWH” dari aspek ”WTP” dan ”ATP”: Studi Kasus Yogyakarta
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Rainwater harvesting (RWH) secara teknis dan ekologis layak dikembangkan di Kartamantul (Yogyakarta, Sleman dan Bantul) DIY dalam bentuk sumur resapan, penampungan air hujan (PAH), kolam konservasi, vegetasi, dan lahan terbuka. Penelitian bertujuan untuk menganalisis kelayakan sosial ekonomi RWH. Kelayakan sosial ditentukan dengan metode Willingness To Pay (WTP) melalui penelitian survey. Kelayakan ekonomi ditentukan dengan metode Cost Benefit Ratio (CBR) dan Ability To Pay (ATP). Hasil penelitian menyimpulkan bahwa teknik RWH yang layak secara sosial ekonomi di daerah surplus dan daerah kritis antropogenik adalah sumur resapan, kolam konservasi, vegetasi, biopori, dan lahan terbuka, sedangkan untuk daerah kritis alami adalah penampungan air hujan.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
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".