PERAN PENYULUH TERHADAP PENGUATAN KELOMPOK TANI DAN REGENERASI PETANI DI KABUPATEN BOGOR JAWA BARAT
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Penelitian bertujuan menganalisis peran penyuluh terhadap penguatan, kemandirian kelompok tani serta regenerasi petani dan menganalisis pengaruh penguatan, kemandirian kelompok tani terhadap regenerasi petani. Penelitian dilakukan di wilayah kerja Balai Penyuluhan Pertanian, Perikanan dan Kehutanan Caringin, Kabupaten Bogor pada Juni sampai November 2017. Populasi penelitian adalah petani muda yang menjadi anggota kelompok tani dan gabungan kelompok tani sebanyak 60 orang yang diambil menggunakan teknik acak sederhana. Data diambil menggunakan kuesioner dengan skala instrumen rating scale. Variabel penelitian terdiri atas peran penyuluh pertanian (X1), penguatan kelompok tani (X2), kemandirian kelompok tani (X3) dan regenerasi petani (Y). Analisis data menggunakan statistik deskriptif, korelasi dan regresi. Hasil penelitian disimpulkan bahwa peran penyuluh pertanian berpengaruh signifikan terhadap penguatan kelompok tani. Peran penyuluh dan penguatan kelompok tani berpengaruh nyata terhadap kemandirian kelompok tani. Peran penyuluh, penguatan kelompok dan kemandirian kelompok tani berpengaruh tidak nyata terhadap regenerasi petani.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 it