EFEKTIFITAS KOMUNIKASI INTERPERSONAL ANTARA PIMPINAN DAN STAF DALAM MENJALIN HUBUNGAN KERJA PADA DINAS PEMBERDAYAAN PEREMPUAN PERLINDUNGAN ANAK DAN KELUARGA BERENCANA KABUPATEN SUPIORI
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Komunikasi menjadi titik yang penting karena segala proses perencanaan dan perorganisasian tidak dapat dijalankan dengan baik tanpa adanya komunikasi. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk mengetahui Efektifitas Komunikasi Interpersonal Antara Pimpinan Dan Staf Dalam Menjalin Hubungan Kerja Pada Dinas Pemberdayaan Perempuan, Perlindungan Anak Dan Keluarga Berencana Kabupaten supiori. Penelitian ini menggunakan pendekatan kualitatif. Teknik pengumpulan data yang digunakan seperti; observasi,wawancara, dan dokumentasi. Metode analisis yang digunakan adalah analisis kualitatif. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa Efektifitas Komunikasi Interpersonal Antar Pimpinan Dan Staf Dalam Menjalin Hubungan Kerja Pada Dinas Pemberdayaan Perempuan, Perlindungan Anak Dan Keluarga Berencana kabupaten supiori cukup efektif berdasarkan lima indikator kualitas komunikasi interpersonal yaitu harus memiliki sikap keterbukaan, empati, sikap mendukung, sikap positif dan sikap kesetaraan.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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 it