MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2605612844 · doi:10.7454/jvi.v3i2.36

KOMUNIKASI RITUAL PEZIARAH “NGALAP BERKAH” DI KAWASAN WISATA GUNUNG KEMUKUS (Studi Etnografi Komunikasi Tentang Budaya Ritual Ziarah di Kawasan Wisata Gunung Kemukus, Desa Pendem, Kecamatan Sumber Lawang, Sragen-Jawa Tengah)

2016· article· en· W2605612844 on OpenAlexaff
Rahmi Setiawati, Priyanto Priyanto

Bibliographic record

VenueJurnal Vokasi Indonesia · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCommunity-based Tourism Development and Sustainability
Canadian institutionsWiLAN (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPilgrimageTourismPilgrimEthnographyGeographyGautama BuddhaSociologyEthnologyAnthropologyBuddhismArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AbstractThis article is explain of ritual commucation pilgrim "ngalap berkah" in the Kemukus mountain, ethnographic study of communication about cultural tourism zone ritual pilgrimage in Mount Kemukus, Pendem Village, District Sumber Lawang, Sragen, Central Java. The results showed that for the local community a message of what is hidden behind this ritual is still ambiguity. But in the process of social interaction between indigenous communities with immigrant communities, both in terms of livelihoods, different behavior patterns, causing local people trying to accept changes to the meaning of "ngalap berkah". It is caused when the pilgrimage locations have changed or constructed for tourist commodification, and is thought to enhance the growth of local economies, which have an impact on improving social and economic conditions of the communities in Pendem.Keywords: ritual communication, ethnographic communications, ritual pilgrimage ngalap berkah, kemukus mountain

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.268 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations2
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJurnal Vokasi IndonesiaSame topicCommunity-based Tourism Development and SustainabilityFrench-language works237,207