MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3021774841 · doi:10.21009/jimd.v13i2.6410

MUSYAWARAH MUFAKAT ATAU PEMILIHAN LEWAT SUARA MAYORITAS DISKURSUS POLA DEMOKRASI DI INDONESIA

2014· article· en· W3021774841 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Dessi Permatasari, Cahyo Seftyono

Bibliographic record

VenueJurnal Ilmiah Mimbar Demokrasi · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIslamic Studies and Radicalism
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of TorontoUniversity of OxfordYale University
KeywordsDemocracyLegislatureGovernment (linguistics)Public administrationPolitical sciencePoliticsValue (mathematics)SociologyLawComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Democracy is the most popular system in our political discourse, not only in the global world but also in Indonesia. Democracy presents the common interest of people. Using all the infra-structure and supra-structure, the people interest could be contested as a government policy. The government policy, in Indonesia, has been produced in two mechanisms: Musyawarah Mufakat and Majority vote. Both of them based on our value called Pancasila. With the problem in democracy including space and number of people, musyawarah mufakat sometime replace in another process like majority vote. The example for majority vote is election, in national both in national scale and local scale such as Citi, Residence, and Province. But in other place musyawarah mufakat also perform in the making of policy in legislative level. In some case, the decision of discourse for government problems was decided by musyawarah mufakat. So, in this case, Musyawarah mufakat and Majority vote are same in the range of democracy system. Both of them also have fundamental reason that has fundamental reason as implementation of Pancasila as national value.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.050

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.003

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.274 · 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 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

Citations12
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJurnal Ilmiah Mimbar DemokrasiSame topicIslamic Studies and RadicalismFrench-language works237,207