MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2995931396 · doi:10.31227/osf.io/vbw4p

Daya Dukung Lahan Pertanian, Permukiman, dan Kawasan Lindung di DAS Sembung, Kabupaten Sleman, DIY

2018· preprint· id· W2995931396 on OpenAlexaff
Arum Sari Widiastuti, Deka Ayu Maretya, Gina Aprila Wangge, Amalya Suci, Afid Nurkholis, Yuli Widyaningsih, Ayu Dyah Rahma, Ardian Abdillah

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageid
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWater and Land Management
Canadian institutionsWiLAN (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsForestryPhysicsGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pembangunan wilayah di DAS Sembung yang semakin meningkat menjadikan analisis daya dukung terhadap lahan permukiman, pertanian, dan kawasan lindung perlu dilakukan. Analisis ketiga daya dukung tersebut dilakukan secara spasial berdasarkan bentuklahan yang terdiri dari lereng kaki, dataran kaki, dan teras sungai. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa daya dukung terhadap permukiman menunjukkan bahwa pada lereng kaki dan dataran kaki memiliki daya dukung yang tinggi sedangkan pada bentuklahan teras sungai memiliki daya dukung permukiman yang rendah. Hal ini dipengaruhi oleh faktor luas lahan layak permukiman dan jumlah penduduk pada masing-masing bentuklahan. Hasil perhitungan daya dukung pertanian menunjukkan bahwa lereng kaki memiliki daya dukung yang tergolong tinggi sedangkan pada dataran kaki dan teras sungai memiliki daya dukung yang rendah, hal ini disebabkan karenatekstur tanah di lereng kaki adalah geluh berpasir yang cocok untuk pertanian sedangkan tektur tanah pada dataran kaki dan teras sungai dominan pasir. Hasil perhitungan daya dukung lindung menunjukkan bahwa pada bentuklahan lereng kaki dan dataran kaki memiliki daya dukung yang tergolong rusak sedangkan pada teras sungai tergolong sedang. Hal ini sangat dipengaruhi olehkondisi alami yang ada pada lereng kaki dan dataran kaki telah banyak berubah akibat aktivitas manusia

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.070

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0210.005

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.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.240 · 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicWater and Land ManagementFrench-language works237,207