MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2749275561

URGENSI PENGATURAN TENTANG UNMANNED AERIAL VEHICLE (UAV) MENURUT PERSPEKTIF HUKUM UDARA INTERNASIONAL

2017· article· id· W2749275561 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Chalif Rafi Prayogi

Bibliographic record

VenueKumpulan Jurnal Mahasiswa Fakultas Hukum · 2017
Typearticle
Languageid
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIndonesian Legal and Regulatory Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceHumanitiesLawArt
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Chalif Rafi Prayogi , Hanif Nur Widhiyanti, Dony Aditya Prasetyo Fakultas Hukum Universitas Brawijaya Email: Chaalifraafi@yahoo.com ABSTRAK Semakin banyaknya pengoperasian yang dilakukan UAV, maka semakin banyak juga potensi-potensi kejadian yang akan ditimbulkan oleh UAV. Urgensi yang ditimbulkan akibat pengoperasianya tersebut tidak lain seperti adanya pelanggaran-pelanggaran baru sudah mulai terjadi seperti adanya pelanggaran privasi seseorang, pelanggaran hak atas pemilik tanah, dan pelanggaran perlindungan data. Pelanggaran tersebut terjadi karena masih belum adanya regulasi atau peraturan tertulis internasional mengenai pengaturan UAV sehingga hal ini menuntut agar dibuatnya suatu pengaturan UAV internasional. Kejadian tersebut berbalik dengan belum tegaknya regulasi terkait pengoperasian UAV itu sendiri. Beberapa Negara seperti Kanada, Amerika Serikat dan Indonesia sudah mulai menerapkan peraturan mengenai pengaturan UAV. Namun, tidak semua negara mengatur UAV sebagai hukum nasionalnya, seperti di India. Hal tersebut dilakukan karena pemerintah India menganggap bahwa UAV sangatlah berbahaya Hal ini membuktikan bahwa harus adanya peraturan tertulis internasional tentang suatu aturan dasar mengenai pengaturan dan pengoperasian UAV sehingga meneruskan tujuan dari pasal 44 Konvensi Chicago 1944 yang mengatakan bahwa semua penerbangan harus mengutamakan keamanan dan keselamatan. Kata Kunci: Urgensi, Pengaturan UAV, Hukum Udara Internasional ABSTRACT The more operations of UAV will cause more potential events. The urgency caused by the operations of UAV is the violation on someone’s privacy, the infringement of the right to the landowner, and the breach of data protection. The violation occurs because there is still no international regulation regarding UAV arrangement. The incident is inversely proportional to law concerning UAV which is not held upright yet. Some countries such as Canada, United States of America and Indonesia have begun implementing regulations on UAV arrangement. However, not all countries regulate the UAV as its national law.  The example of such country in India. This is done because the Indian government considers that UAV is very dangerous. This proves that there should be an international written rule on a basic rule concerning the regulation and operation of the UAV so as to continue the objective of article 44 of the Chicago Conventions of 1944 which states that all flights must prioritize security and safety. Keywords: Urgency, UAV Arrangement, International Air Law

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.531
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0110.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.029
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.272 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations1
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueKumpulan Jurnal Mahasiswa Fakultas HukumSame topicIndonesian Legal and Regulatory StudiesFrench-language works237,207