MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2956195831 · doi:10.24843/km.2019.v07.i08.p01

KAJIAN TENTANG IZIN PADA INDUSTRI RUMAH TANGGA PANGAN

2019· article· id· W2956195831 on OpenAlexaff
Ni Made Sellia, Ida Bagus Putra Atmadja

Bibliographic record

VenueKertha Semaya Journal Ilmu Hukum · 2019
Typearticle
Languageid
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIndonesian Legal and Regulatory Studies
Canadian institutionsEncana (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhysicsArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Karya ilmiah ini membahas permasalahan terkait konflik norma pada Undang-Undang Nomor 36 Tahun 2009 tentang Kesehatan dan Undang-Undang Nomor 18 Tahun 2012 tentang Pangan. Pasal 111 ayat (2) Undang-Undang Nomor 36 Tahun 2009 tentang Kesehatan menentukan bahwa makanan dan minuman hanya dapat diedarkan setelah mendapat izin edar sesuai dengan ketentuan peraturan perundang-undangan, sedangkan Pasal 91 ayat (2) Undang-Undang Nomor 18 Tahun 2012 tentang Pangan mengatur kewajiban memiliki izin edar dikecualikan terhadap pangan olahan tertentu yang diproduksi oleh industri rumah tangga. Tujuan dari penulisan karya ilmiah ini adalah untuk mengetahui izin pada industri rumah tangga pangan dan tanggung jawab pelaku usaha industri rumah tangga pangan terhadap pangan yang diedarkannya. Adapun metode penulisan yang digunakan adalah metode penelitian hukum normatif dengan pendekatan perundang-undangan (The Statue Approach). Hasil dari penelitian ini adalah terkait pemberlakuan izin edar pada makanan dan minuman produksi industri rumah tangga pangan kemudian mengacu pada Undang-Undang Nomor 18 Tahun 2012 tentang Pangan berdasarkan asas lex specialis derogate legi generali. Meskipun izin edar dikecualikan pada industri rumah tangga pangan, namun industri rumah tangga pangan wajib untuk memiliki sertifikat produksi pangan industri rumah tangga (SPP-IRT).
 Kata Kunci : industri rumah tangga, izin, pangan.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.623
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.003

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.239 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
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 venueKertha Semaya Journal Ilmu HukumSame topicIndonesian Legal and Regulatory StudiesFrench-language works237,207