MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3101304892 · doi:10.37950/wpaj.v2i1.903

KINERJA BIDANG MITIGASI BENCANA ALAM KABUPATEN SUBANG

2020· article· id· W3101304892 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe World of Public Administration Journal · 2020
Typearticle
Languageid
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPublic Administration in Developing Nations
Canadian institutionsWiLAN (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPsychologySociologyGeographyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Tujuan penelitian ini adalah untuk mengetahui bagaimana kinerja bidang mitigasi bencana alam di badan penanggulangan bencana daerah melalui kegiatan observasi lapangan. Penelitian ini mengacu pada pendapat Agus Dwiyanto (1995:9) menjelaskan bahwa pada kinerja organisasi terfokus pada aspek produktifitas, kualitas pelayanan, responsivitas, responsibilitas, dan akuntabilitas. Metode penelitian yang digunakan adalah desriptif dengan pendekatan kualitatif. Penelitian diarahkan untuk membuat deskripsi, gambaran secara sistematis, faktual dan akurat mengenai fakta-fakta. Jenis data yang digunakan adalah data primer dan sekunder dengan instrument penelitian menggunakan pedoman wawancara sebagai penuntun bagi peneliti untuk mengembangkan pertanyaan. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa produktifitas yang berbicara tetang bagaimana pemberian pelayanan petugas kepada masyarakat, kualitas pelayanan berbicara pada kualitas sumber daya manusia yang dimiliki, responsivitas berbicara tentang kecepat tanggapan para petugas dalam pemberian pelayanan, responsibilitas berbicara tentang pertanggungjawaban individu dari petugas dan akuntablitas berbicara tentang pertanggungjawaban organisasi atau kelompok petugas. Pada intinya kinerja bidang mitigasi bencana alam di Badan Penanggulanga Bencana Daerah Kabupaten Subang belum optimal.
 
 The purpose of this study was to determine how the performance of the natural disaster mitigation field in the regional disaster management agency through field observation activities. This study refers to the opinion of Agus Dwiyanto (1995: 9) explaining that the organizational performance is focused on aspects of productivity, service quality, responsiveness, responsibility, and accountability. The research method used is descriptive qualitative approach. Research is directed to make a description, a systematic, factual and accurate description of the facts. The type of data used are primary and secondary data with research instruments using interview guidelines as a guide for researchers to develop questions. The results showed that productivity spoke about how the provision of service to officers to the community, quality of service spoke to the quality of human resources owned, responsiveness spoke of the speed of responses of officers in service delivery, responsibility spoke of individual accountability of officers and accountability spoke of organizational responsibility or group of officers. In essence, the performance of the field of natural disaster mitigation in the Subang District Disaster Management Agency is not yet optimal.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.942
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.072
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.261 · 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