MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2622384547 · doi:10.20473/ydk.v28i2.1881

PENERAPAN PRINSIP-PRINSIP GOOD GOVERNANCE DALAM PENYELENGGARAAN REFORMA AGRARIA DI INDONESIA

2013· article· en· W2622384547 on OpenAlexaff
Muhammad Ilham Arisaputra

Bibliographic record

VenueYuridika · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicCoastal Management and Development
Canadian institutionsEncana (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAgrarian societyAgrarian reformAgrarian systemPoliticsContext (archaeology)Government (linguistics)Political scienceCorporate governancePovertyPublic administrationEconomic growthEconomic systemPolitical economyEconomicsGeographyAgricultureLawManagement

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Agrarian reform is one of solutions to overcome the poverty. The agrarian reform needs a political commitment from the government. In addition, agrarian information is important to figure out the problems and its potential to overcome the problems. Agrarian reform can not depend on the authority and political power of the government only, it also needs the involvement of the community and other stakeholders. In the context of regional authonomy, the authority of agrarian reform will be the authority of the local government, therefore the involvement of the community in every stage is necessary. National Planning for Agrarian Reform Programme should be conformed with the characteristics of the region and the inputs from the stakeholders, since they understand the situation and the agrarian problems in the region.Keywords: agrarian reform, stakeholders, landreform.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.050

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0050.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.002

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.177
Teacher spread0.171 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations42
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueYuridikaSame topicCoastal Management and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207