KESESUAIAN LOKASI DAN TANGGAPAN MASYARAKAT UNTUK TEMPAT PEMROSESAN AKHIR (TPA) SAMPAH DI KOTA KOTAMOBAGU
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aims to analyze the appropriate location and community responses for waste landfill sites and to determine the factors that limit the level of land suitability for waste landfill in Kota Kotamobagu. The study was conducted in the designated area for the development of the Kotamobagu Municipal TPA location based on the RTRW document of Kota Kotamobagu for three months from February to March 2017. This research is observational. Research data is analyzed through quantitative descriptive method. The results showed that in the area designated as the location of TPA development in Kota Kotamobagu there is one candidate location that enter on the category of potential worthy in the area of West Mongkonai Village based on the criteria of the feasibility of SNI 03-3241-1994. Communities around the landfill development / expansion sites for the Small Poyowa TPA tend to accept the presence of waste landfill and for the development site of West Mongkonai waste landfill, people in the area tend to deny the existence of waste landfill sites. The limiting factor of land suitability for the landfill location in Kota Kotamobagu is classified into two namely the main limiting factor that is the social environment of the community in the form of rejection of the landfill location by the community around the landfill site and the physical limiting factor which consists of land permeability, rain intensity and agricultural area.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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.
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".