STRATEGI KOMUNIKASI BISNIS DI KAMPUNG WISATA BISNIS TEGALWARU CIAMPEA KABUPATEN BOGOR
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AbstractThe study aims to know the communication strategy business that is applied by Kampung Wisata Bisnis Tegalwaru and review the strategy of the long run it will be carried out in the face of the licensing related to the implementation of the communication strategy business. The metode of researches is descriptive qualitatif method, in obtaining data using the method of indepth interviews, observations, documentation, and the study of the library. The result showed that in making the communication strategy business, Kampung Wisata Bisnis Tegalwaru make a long-term plan called Renstra (Rencana Strategis) the community empowerment. The obstacles or factors inhibiting the way the process of communication strategy to the business in Kampung Wisata Bisnis Tegalwaru is: Lack of facilities and infrastucture to accomodate visitors in large numbers, the lack of coordination in the team, as well as lisencing Kampung Wisata Bisnis Tegalwaru as a tourist village that hasn’t been registered in the Departement of Culture and Tourism of Bogor Regency. Keywords: Strategy, Communication Strategy Business, Kampung Wisata Bisnis Tegalwaru
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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".