PROBLEMA PENEGAKAN HUKUM PELAYANAN PUBLIK OLEH LEMBAGA OMBUDSMAN REPUBLIK INDONESIA BERBASIS PARTISIPASI MASYARAKAT
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<p><strong>Abstrak</strong><br />Penyelenggaraan pelayanan publik saat ini menjadi titik sentral tolok ukur tertib hukum administrasi dalam rangka mewujudkan tujuan negara untuk memajukan kesejahteraan rakyat. Ombusdman sebagai lembaga yang memiliki kewenangan pengawasan terhadap penyelenggaraan pelayanan publik diharapkan dapat mewujudkan pemerintahan yang bersih dan baik. Namun demikian, keberadaan Ombudsman tidak sepenuhnya mampu mengatasi praktik tindak pidana korupsi yang berawal dari perilaku maladministrasi oleh oknum penyelenggara pemerintahan. Bedasarkan itu maka di masa depan perlu pembaharuan hukum secara terintegral dan komprehensif yang meliputi substansi hukum yaitu pembaharuan UU No. 37 Tahun 2008 dan sekaligus membangun struktur kelembagaan hukum Ombusdman dan kultur hukum masyarakat dalam mendapatkan jasa pelayanan publik.<br /><strong></strong></p><p><strong>Abstract</strong></p><p>The focal point of orderliness in administration law is public service performance in order to establish the pupose of the nation which is public's welfare. Ombudsman as institution that has monitoring authority of public service execution is expected to create clean and good government. Nevertheles, existency of Ombudsman is not fully capable to overcome corruption practice that begins from maladmistration practice. Therefore, comprehensive and integral law reform is needed, including amandement Act No. 37/2008, build Ombudsman as institution, and raise public culture regarding receiving public service.</p>
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it