MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2900789475 · doi:10.12962/j20861206.v32i1.4503

ANALYSIS OF THE AVAILABILITY OF WATER RESOURCES AND CONSERVATION EFFORTS SUB DAS LESTI DISTRICT OF MALANG

2018· article· en· W2900789475 on OpenAlexaff
Abdul Somat Bukori, Rachmat Boedisantoso

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Civil Engineering · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAgricultural and Environmental Management
Canadian institutionsWiLAN (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRainwater harvestingHydrology (agriculture)Environmental scienceWater resource managementVegetation (pathology)Investment (military)GeographyForestryAgroforestryEngineeringEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Lesti sub basins is one of the upstream part of the Brantas river basin located in the district of Malang. Conditions Lesti sub-basins have been damaged thereby potentially experiencing a water deficit. The deficit of water in the dry season in 2017 amounted to 2.141.057 m³ and 2023 amounted to 3.881.593 m³. To overcome these deficits conservation efforts both vegetation and mechanically. Area of land required until 2023 with the planting of agarwood trees covering an area of 18,27 km², covering an area of 15,53 km² and a bamboo plant Poran 51,75 km². Needs rainwater harvesting roofs media as much as 3 sump capacity of 24 m³. Embung needs as much as 3 each reservoir capacity of 800.000 m³. Embung investment costs Rp. 207 205 545 000, - done in 2017 until 2018. Financial aspects of the construction of the water reservoir with an interest rate of 7% per year IRR = 13,19%> 7%; BCR, i (7%) = 1,34> 1 and NPV, i (7%) = Rp. 91.152.353.632,-. The construction of such Eligible.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.055

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.196 · 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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Civil EngineeringSame topicAgricultural and Environmental ManagementFrench-language works237,207