ANALISIS KESALAHAN BERBAHASA PADA PENULISAN MEDIA LUAR RUANG DI PANYABUNGAN
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menganalisis kesalahan berbahasa pada penulisan media luar ruang di Panyabungan dan memperbaiki kesalahan berbahasa tersebut sesuai dengan kaidah bahasa Indonesia. Metode penelitian yang digunakan penulis adalah penelitian deskriptif kualitatif yaitu mendeskripsikan tulisan-tulisan pada media luar ruang kemudian dianalisis kesalahan penulisannya dan memperbaiki tulisan tersebut. Objek dalam penelitian ini adalah media luar ruang di Panyabungan Kabupaten Mandailing Natal. Penelitian ini dilaksanakan hanya berdasarkan fakta sebagaimana yang ada dilapangan. Berdasarkan hasil penelitian dari hasil analisis data-data media luar ruang di Panyabungan dapat disimpulkan bahwa masih banyak kesalahan-kesalahan penulisan yang terdapat pada media luar ruang tersebut. Bentuk-bentuk kesalahan tersebut berupa diksi/pilihan kata yang kurang tepat, semantik/pemaknaan kata yang tidak pada tempatnya ejaan yang salah seperti tanda baca, pemakaian huruf kapital, penulisan singkatan, garis miring dan lain-lain, dan masih banyak kesalahan yang ditemukan dilapangan.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.023 | 0.005 |
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".