The Case of Syiqaq in Judges’s Gorontalo Religion Court Perspective
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Penelitian ini membahas persepsi hakim di Pengadilan Agama Gorontalo tentang perkara syiqaq. Penelitian ini adalah penelitian lapangan dengan metode pengumpulan data berupa pengamatan, wawancara dan dokumentasi. Data yang terkumpul diolah dan dianalisis dengan deksriptif kualitatif. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa penerapan perkara syiqaq di Pengadilan Agama menimbulkan gesekan persepsi antara syariat Islam, undang-undang perkawinan serta Peraturan Mahkamah Agung Republik Indonesia sehingga menimbulkan kontroversial di era sekarang ini. Perceraian karena syiqaq mempunyai karakteristik, yaitu melibatkan 2 orang hakam atau juru damai dari kedua belah pihak, namun dalam aktualisasi di dalam lembaga Peradilan Agama telah berubah sehingga syiqaq tidak nampak lagi dan hanya menjadi satu wacana teori saja.
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 | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.021 | 0.014 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.000 |
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".