KAJIAN POLA OPERASI WADUK TUGU DENGAN INFLOW DEBIT ANDALAN DAN INFLOW DEBIT BANGKITAN AWLR
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
Untuk mendapatkan pola operasi waduk Tugu yang efektif maka perlu adanya suatu kajian perbandingan antara inflow dari debit andalan dan inflow dari debit bangkitan AWLR. Pembangkitan debit Hujan dengan metode FJ. Mock. Data Debit yang di analisis adalah debit andalan 80 % dan 50 %. Untuk perhitungan debit bangkitan adalah perpanjangan data debit AWLR sampai dengan tahun 2020 dengan metode Thomas Fiering. Alternatif tanam menggunakan tiga alternatif tanam yaitu alternatif tanam I (padi-padi-padi), alternatif tanam II (padi-padi-palawija), alternatif tanam III (padi-palawija-palawija). Simulasi layanan dilakukan untuk setiap pola tata tanam dengan mengacu pada dua pendekatan yaitu luasan tanam irigasi 1200 Ha dan keberhasilan layanan 95 %. Alternatif tanam yang paling menguntungkan adalah alternatif tanam III (padi-palawija-palawija) dengan keuntungan Rp. 290.745.750.000,- dengan inflow debit andalan 50%. Dari hasil keseluruhan simulasi layanan tersebut dapat disusun grafik pola muka air waduk, sehingga didapatkan suatu bentuk rule curve operasi waduk Tugu.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 it