MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2912178172 · doi:10.25104/warlit.v25i6.740

Pengaruh Tingkat Komitmen Lingkungan Freight Forwarder Terhadap Respon Kebijakan Green Freight Transport

2019· article· id· W2912178172 on OpenAlexaff
Karmini Karmini, B. Kombaitan, Puji Lestari

Bibliographic record

VenueWarta Penelitian Perhubungan · 2019
Typearticle
Languageid
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicManagement and Optimization Techniques
Canadian institutionsEncana (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBusinessBusiness administrationForestryGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Kegiatan transportasi barang memberikan dampak negatif berupa polusi udara yang cukup signifikanpada lingkungan. Kebijakan uji kir kendaraan bermotor saat ini masih belum efektif untuk mengurangiemisi polusi udara karena emisi co2 harus dikontrol melalui pengurangan konsumsi bahan bakar.Diperlukan kebijakan yang dapat mengurangi polusi udara melalui pengurangan konsumsi bahan bakarkendaraan bermotor dengan pendekatan ASI (Avoid, Shift, Improve). Respon freight forwarder sebagai pihakyang terkena dampak langsung kebijakan akan berbeda-beda, diperkirakan dipengaruhi oleh tingkatkomitmen lingkungan perusahaan. Analisis klaster digunakan untuk mengelompokkan tingkat komitmenlingkungan freight forwarder, sedangkan untuk mengetahui pengaruh tingkat komitmen lingkungan freightforwarder terhadap respon kebijakan green freight transport dilakukan analisis Anova satu jalur. Hasil analisisklaster menunjukkan hampir separuh perusahaan (40% atau 24 perusahaan) mempunyai tingkat komitmenreaktif, 33 % (20 perusahaan) perusahaan mempunyai tingkat komitmen akomodatif dan 27% (16 perusahaan)perusahaan mempunyai tingkat komitmen proaktif. Dari uji hipotesis, dapat diketahui bahwa perusahaandengan tingkat komitmen yang berbeda (proaktif, akomodatif, reaktif) tidak memberikan respon yangberbeda terhadap usulan kebijakan green freight transport.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score0.120

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0360.005

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.197 · 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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWarta Penelitian PerhubunganSame topicManagement and Optimization TechniquesFrench-language works237,207