MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2994087246

SISTEM PENDUKUNG KEPUTUSAN PEMILIHAN BIBIT UNGGUL TANAMAN JAMBU MADU MENGGUNAKAN METODE SAW

2018· article· id· W2994087246 on OpenAlexaff
Irfan Fandinata, Budi Serasi Ginting

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageid
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Growth and Agriculture Techniques
Canadian institutionsKootenay Association for Science & Technology
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematicsHorticultureBiology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Jambu madu adalah jambu yang memiliki kemanisan yang luar biasa. Tingkat kemanisan jambu madu dapat mengalahkan kemanisan buah apel dan buah lainnya. Jambu madu juga memiliki daging yang rapuh yang membuat lezat saat dimakan. Jambu madu memiliki kombinasi tingkat kemanisan tertinggi di Indonesia mencapai 12, sampai 15,5 brix. Buah jambunya juga memiliki buah yang besar 200 sampai 300 gram perbuah. Bibit unggul dan bermutu merupakan salah satu kunci untuk mendapatkan pertanaman yang mampu memberikan hasil yang optimal. Bibit unggul dan bermutu adalah benih yang berasal dari varietas murni dengan persentasi perkecambahan tinggi, bebas dari hama dan pengakit, dan tempat perawatan yang cocok dengan jenis jambu tersebut.  Untuk mendapatkan jambu madu yang berkualitas harus dari bibit jambu madu yang unggul dan berkualitas pula, dalam penentuan bibit jambu madu yang unggul dapat dilihat dari beberapa criteria yaitu tekstur tanah yang cocok berdasarkan jenis jambu madu, suhu, ketahanan dan masa produksi. Sistem Pendukung Keputusan ini diharapkan dapat membantu petani dalam menentukan bibit jambu madu yang berkualitas dan dapat mempermudah maupun mempercepat pekerjaan tersebut. Penelitian ini menggunakan metode SAW berdasarkan kriteria yang telah ditentukan diperoleh hasil perhitungan SAW berdasarkan perankingan tertinggi ke rendah yaitu bibit jambu madu jenis deli hijau dengan nilai 9,33, bibit jambu madu jenis super green dengan nilai 7,17, dan bibit jambu madu jenis kesuma merah dengan nilai 6,83.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.465
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.203 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPlant Growth and Agriculture TechniquesFrench-language works237,207