STRATEGI PENGEMBANGAN EKONOMI SYARIAH MELALUI PENGUATAN FUNGSI PENGADILAN AGAMA DALAM PENYELESAIAN SENGKETA
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Saat ini kegiatan ekonomi syariah berkembang pesat di Indonesia. Perkembangan tersebut diikuti juga dengan bermunculannya sengketa ekonomi syariah. Penyelesaian sengketa ekonomi syariah saat ini menjadi kewenangan Pengadilan Agama, sehingga fungsi Pengadilan Agama perlu diperkuat. Penelitian ini membahas permasalahan bagaimana metode penyelesaian sengketa ekonomi syariah di Indonesia, bagaimana penyelesaian sengketa ekonomi syariah di Pengadilan Agama dan bagaimana strategi penguatan fungsi Pengadilan Agama. Penelitian ini merupakan penelitian hukum normatif yang bersifat deskriptif dengan menggunakan pendekatan perundang-undangan dan pendekatan analitis. Berdasarkan hasil penelitian disimpulkan bahwa penyelesaian sengketa ekonomi syariah menjadi kewenangan Pengadilan Agama. Proses penyelesaian sengketa ekonomi syariah juga didukung dengan regulasi yang mengarah pada proses peradilan yang sederhana, cepat dan biaya ringan, namun selain dukungan regulasi juga diperlukan strategi untuk meningkatkan kualitas kelembagaan Pengadilan Agama. Oleh sebab itu penulis menyarankan perlu dilakukan sosialisasi fungsi dan mengubah stigma tentang Pengadilan Agama.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.029 | 0.008 |
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".