MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2942335652 · doi:10.33378/jppik.v11i2.88

Profil Aktivitas Ekonomi Masyarakat Perikanan sekitar Waduk di Jawa Barat

2017· article· id· W2942335652 on OpenAlexaff
M Harja Supena

Bibliographic record

VenueJurnal Penyuluhan Perikanan dan Kelautan · 2017
Typearticle
Languageid
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicCoastal Management and Development
Canadian institutionsEncana (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsEnvironmental science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk mengetahui profil kegiatan ekonomi masyarakat di sekitar waduk. Metode yang digunakan adalah Metode Deskriptif dengan pendekatan Kualitatif dan Kuantitatif. Pengambilan sampel menggunakan Tehnik Purposive Sampling, yaitu sampel dilakukan terhadap pelaku utama perikanan yang ada di 5 waduk (Waduk Jatiluhur, Waduk Cirata,Waduk Saguling,Waduk Jatigede, dan Waduk Darma). Tehnik pengumpulan data menggunakan wawancara dengan menggunakan instrumen berupa kuesioner yang berisi open dan close question. Dalam pengolahan data dilakukan penetapan nilai (skor) terhadap setiap pertanyaan yang berada dalam setiap sub sistem usaha. Hasil penelitian terhadap 5 waduk yang ditinjau dari 5 sub sistem usaha (sarana produksi, produksi, pasca produksi, pemasaran, dan layanan pendukung) diperoleh nilai (skor) sebagai berikut: Waduk Jatiluhur (10,96), Waduk Cirata (9,24), Waduk Saguling (10,86), Waduk Jatigede (9,32), dan Waduk Darma (8,92). Dari hasil penilaian tersebut, maka diperoleh gambaran tentang profil aktivitas ekonomi masyarakat di sekitar waduk. Semoga penelitian ini dapat dijadikan sebagai bahan referensi untuk menambah kepustakaan dan pengembangan pengetahuan tentang profil aktivitas ekonomi masyarakat di sekitar waduk.

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)0.004
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 score0.076

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0230.006

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.226 · 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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJurnal Penyuluhan Perikanan dan KelautanSame topicCoastal Management and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207