MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3030109259 · doi:10.36424/jpsb.v6i1.167

REPRESENTASI KUCING DALAM FOKLOR SUNDA

2020· article· id· W3030109259 on OpenAlexaff
Ani Rostiyati

Bibliographic record

VenueJURNAL PENELITIAN SEJARAH DAN BUDAYA · 2020
Typearticle
Languageid
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicChild Development and Education
Canadian institutionsEncana (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceGeographyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Penggambaran kedekatan kucing terdapat dalam berbagai folklor di berbagai belahan dunia. Pada masyarakat Sunda, kedekatan tersebut direpresentasikan dalam folklor lisan Nini Anteh dan permainan tradisional anak. Namun, kajian mendalam tentang keterkaitan keberadaan kucing dalam folklor lisan cerita rakyat Nini Anteh dan permainan tradisional anak belum pernah dilakukan. Oleh sebab itu, tujuan kajian ini adalah mengungkap representasi kucing dalam foklor lisan tersebut. Adapun metode penelitian adalah deskriptif-kualitatif dengan pengambilan data melalui studi pustaka serta wawancara mendalam pada informan yang dianggap memiliki enkulturasi penuh. Data yang telah diperoleh kemudian dianalisis meliputi alur, makna, dan fungsinya. Hasil dari analisa tersebut diperoleh bahwa kata kucing dalam permainan tradisional anak merepresentasikan identitas budaya lokal dan kolektif bagi masyarakat Sunda serta media pendidikan bagi anak. Sedangkan kucing dalam cerita rakyat Nini Anteh dipandang sebagai subjek yang penting sebagai representasi dari domestikasi Nini Anteh yang menempatkan perempuan sebagai subordinat dari laki-laki dan menimbulkan ketimpangan sosial berbasis identitas gender.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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 score0.074
Threshold uncertainty score0.247

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0040.002
Scholarly communication0.0090.006
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0740.020

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.259 · 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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJURNAL PENELITIAN SEJARAH DAN BUDAYASame topicChild Development and EducationFrench-language works237,207