META ANALISIS KARYA ILMIAH MAHASISWA PENELITIAN DAN EVALUASI PENDIDIKAN
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Tujuan penelitian yaitu (1) Mengetahui Gambaran peta penelitian tesis mahasiswa program studi penelitian dan evaluasi pendidikan program pascasarjana UNM, (2) Mengetahui Penelitian tesis mahasiswa memiliki relevansi dengan visi-misi program studi penelitian dan evaluasi pendidikan program pascasarjana UNM, (3) Mengetahui Apakah judul, rumusan masalah, tujuan dan kesimpulan penelitian tesis mahasiswa penelitian dan evaluasi pendidikan memiliki keterkaitan yang sesuai kaidah ilmiah. Jenis penelitian ex post facto yang berbentuk survey dan analisis kepustakaan. Teknik analisis yang digunakan adalah deskriptif dan uji sensitivitas. Hasil penelitian ini terlihat bahwa (1) Semua judul sudah menggambarkan ciri khas Program Studi Penelitian dan Evaluasi Pendidikan, (2) Semua hasil penelitian mahasiswa memiliki relevansi dengan visi-misi program studi penelitian dan evaluasi pendidikan program pascasarjana UNM, (3) Terdapat 20 (25,64%) judul penelitian yang tidak memiliki keterkaitan yang sesuai kaidah ilmiah keliru dari 78 judul penelitian yang menjadi sampel.
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 | 0.018 | 0.064 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.016 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 0.001 |
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.
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".