ANALISIS KETIMPANGAN PEMBANGUNAN DI KAWASAN BANUA ANAM DITINJAU DARI ASPEK EKONOMI,SOSIAL,DAN ANGGARAN
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study is (1) to find out the Development Inequality in the Banua Anam Region (2) See the Inequality in the Development of the Banua Anam Region (2) Which regency has the highest and lowest IPD. The method used in this research is quantitative descriptive analysis and Analysis of Development Planning Techniques. The results of the Tabalong and Balangan Research included developed but depressed areas, for Tapin. Hulu Sungai Selatan, Hulu Sunga Tengah, and Hulu Sungai Utara enter developed developed areas including developing regions. Inequality in the Banua Anam region is still high, areas of increasing inequality are Tabalong and Balangan. Economic Aspects are the most dominant in creating inequality. The highest Regional Development Indexes are Tabalong, Balangan, and Tapin,Keywords: Development Inequality, Regional Development Index, IndexWilliamson, Klassen Typology, Human Development Index
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".