MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2944509769 · doi:10.31289/jppuma.v7i1.2167

Identifikasi Kegiatan Program Kampung Keluarga Berencana di Kabupaten Aceh Tengah

2019· article· id· W2944509769 on OpenAlexaff
Sofyan Syahnur, Yossi Diantimala, Ridha Ilham

Bibliographic record

VenueJPPUMA Jurnal Ilmu Pemerintahan dan Sosial Politik Universitas Medan Area · 2019
Typearticle
Languageid
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMarriage and Family Dynamics
Canadian institutionsEncana (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDocumentationFamily planningDeclarationPopulationSocioeconomicsData collectionWork (physics)GeographyEconomic growthSociologyPolitical scienceDemographyEngineeringSocial scienceResearch methodology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this study identified the activities of the Family Planning Village Population, Family Planning and Family Development program in Middle Aceh District. The study location were grouped according to the Geographic Difficulties Index of the Central Bureau of Statistics. Research data collection uses qualitative methods, namely interviews, documentation, and observations with the Village Head / Geuchik (informant 1), extension / coach of the Family Planning Village (informant 2), and management of the Family Planning Village (informant 3). The results of this study indicate that the implementation of family planning village activities in the village is of high difficulty and is not difficult geographically has been relatively active, namely the management and mentor and companion of the family planning village to work well and directed, while the villages with moderate difficulty level geographically less active. Generally, the activities of the Family Planning Village carried out are posyandu, posbindu, elderly gymnastics and other activities. The activities of the Prosperous Family Income Improvement Group are also not yet implemented, where the activity is expected to empower the village community economically. Cross-sectoral activities have also not been implemented and coordinated well, it seems that there is no program that can be felt directly even though the commitment at the beginning of the declaration has been carried out.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.001

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.249 · 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

Citations6
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJPPUMA Jurnal Ilmu Pemerintahan dan Sosial Politik Universitas Medan AreaSame topicMarriage and Family DynamicsFrench-language works237,207