Bibliographic record
Abstract
Penelitian ini membahas mengenai Akta Perdamaian di Luar Pengadilan dan Pelaksanaannya. Akta perdamaian yang dibuat di hadapan notaris yang mempunyai kekuatan hukum seperti putusan hakim yang telah mempunyai kekuatan hukum tetap. Kajian ini dilakukan dengan Penelitian Hukum Normatif melalui studi Kepustakaan. Penelitian ini menggunakan metode pendekatan kualitatif dengan analisis data secara induktif. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan dalam proses penyelesaian sengketa dengan akta perdamaian merupakan alat bukti tertulis, terkuat dan terpenuh dan memberi sumbangan nyata bagi penyelesaian sengketa secara cepat dan murah. Notaris berwenang dalam membuat akta otentik. Akta perdamaian yang dibuat di hadapan Notaris memiliki kedudukan hukum yang sah terhadap putusan pengadilan dan sebagai alat pembuktian lengkap. Akta perdamaian notariil memiliki kekuatan hukum yang tetap, dan kekuatan eksekutorial dengan adanya penetapan yang dikeluarkan oleh Ketua Pengadilan Negeri berisi perintah eksekusi agar akta perdamaian dapat dilaksanakan.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.034 | 0.015 |
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".