The Negative Stigma Against the Bajo Tribe and its Impact on Local Culture: Study of the Bajo Tribe in Bungin Village of South Konawe
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aims to examine and analyze the negative stigma of Bajo tribe and its impact on the existence of the local culture of Bajo tribe. Data collection techniques are conducted through in-depth interviews, document studies and focused discussions. Data analysis is done through data reduction, data presentation and conclusion. The results show that the Bajo tribe is still regarded as an underdeveloped tribe, always viewed as a wild, unruly, rough, stubborn and introvert. Bajo tribe is also viewed as part of society that is still paternalisitic and pragmatic, alienated, isolated, and left behind, has a low civilization that must be initiated with various empowerment programs. Bajo tribe is often also imaged as a prototype of willful society, because they reject development, even in the past Bajo tribe in Bungin was once accused of being the next generation of Darul Islam / Tentara Islam Indonesia (DI / TII). The bias of negative imagery results the change in mentality and cultural values of the local Bajo tribe into marginal positions. The mentality of Bajo society is now transformed into a consumptive society and false capitalism. Currently, there are many local wisdom of Bajo tribe who experienced weakening, even the oral tradition began to experience extinction. While the older generation who understand the culture of Bajo also diminish due to the age factor, and many younger generations of Bajo who no longer know and understand the local culture of Bajo, due to the weakness of inheritance system and cultural transformation of the older generation to the younger generation.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".