Bibliographic record
Abstract
As consumption varies across income groups, so does savings and investment pattern vary among investors.The Consumer Spending in Indonesia has increased from 1440498.70 IDR Billion in the third quarter of 2018 to 1441814 IDR Billion in the fourth quarter of 2018. The average consumer spending in Indonesia was 1168680.44 IDR Billion from 2010 until 2018, reaching an all-time high of 1441814 IDR Billion in the fourth quarter of 2018 and a record low of 926097.50 IDR Billion in the first quarter of 2010. This paper aims to examine the preferred investment avenues by Indonesians in Jakarta, Indonesia. The various avenues for investment in Indonesiaare share market, mutual funds, foreign exchange, properties, government bonds and fixed deposit in banks. The development of Islamic mutual funds (sharia) also plays a great role in Indonesia as the performance of Islamic mutual funds being pretty good. One of the reasons why People invest in sharia funds is that,it has got compatibility with Islamic ethics, which people strongly believe in as a part of their culture.
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 | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".