MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2888085720 · doi:10.14710/pwk.v14i2.19258

KAJIAN RISIKO BENCANA LONGSOR KECAMATAN LOANO KABUPATEN PURWOREJO

2018· article· id· W2888085720 on OpenAlexaff
Retno Widiastutik, Imam Bukhori

Bibliographic record

VenueJurnal Pembangunan Wilayah dan Kota · 2018
Typearticle
Languageid
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicLandslides and related hazards
Canadian institutionsEncana (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsForestryGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Kecamatan Loano berada di bagian timur-selatan Kabupaten Purworejo, merupakan daerah rawan longsor yang disertai kondisi sosial ekonomi yang menambah kerentanannya. Studi ini bertujuan untuk mengkaji risiko bencana longsor, cakupan kajian meliputi karakteristik ancaman, kerentanan {sosial ekonomi & fisik lingkungan, kapasitas (respon lingkungan)} serta risiko bencana. Pengolahan data menggunakan software ArcGIS dan SPSS. Secara fisik alam, ancaman risiko longsor bervariasi yaitu 21,36 km2 (40,09%) indeks rendah, 13.14 km2 (24,66%) sedang dan 18,78 km2 (35,25%) tinggi. Indeks kerentanan sosial ekonomi & fisik lingkungan terdiri dari 3 desa indeks rendah, 11 desa sedang dan 7 desa tinggi. Karakteristik kapasitas (respon lingkungan) diambil dengan menggunakan kuesioner individu masyarakat dan pemerintah desa. Karakteristik kapasitas (respon lingkugan)-nya adalah 14 desa indeks rendah, 4 desa sedang dan 3 desa tinggi. Kerentanan secara holistickyang merupakan jumlah total kerentanan sosial ekonomi & fisik lingkungan serta kapasitas (respon lingkungan) terdapat 3 desa indeks rendah, 4 desa sedang dan 14 desa tinggi. Tingkat risiko bencana longsor bervariasi, terdiri dari rendah 6,72 km2 (12,62%) , sedang 24,59 km2 (46,15%) hingga tinggi 21,96 km2 (41,23%). Risiko longsor yang tinggi perlu dikurangi dengan menurunkan kerentananya. Selanjutnya, diharapkan metode ini dapat diterapkan di wilayah lainnya yang memiliki karakteristik hampir sama dengan Kecamatan Loano.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.077

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0230.002

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.220 · 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations4
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJurnal Pembangunan Wilayah dan KotaSame topicLandslides and related hazardsFrench-language works237,207