Footwear Trade Industry: An Analysis of Export Strategy Based on Indonesia Main Export Destination
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aimed to identify the factors affecting footwear trade industry in Indonesia based on Indonesia’s main export destination. Understanding these factors could help leaders in the trade industry to plan their strategies better and further research on footwear trading. A set of data was obtained from Badan Pusat Statistic (BPS) based on the data from Indonesia’s footwear main export destination namely: United States, China, Belgium, Germany, Japan, United Kingdom, Netherlands, Korea, Italy, Australia, Mexico, France, Canada, Denmark, Singapore, Brazil, Hong Kong, Russian Federation, Chile, Argentina and other countries. Exploratory factor analysis was used to identify the underlying dimensions of countries as Indonesia main export destination. The result of the study showed that the sample size was adequate for the analysis and the communalities of all the variables were more than .4; therefore, all the variables were useful in the model. Since, the variables were identified in a factor of 0.7 or more, the result showed that all factors based on Indonesia’s main export destination which was from the years 2012-2016 contributed to the exports of footwear in Indonesia.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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".