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 OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.164
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.006

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.

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