PENERAPAN ALGORITMA K-MEANS CLUSTERING ANALYSIS PADA KASUS PENDERITA HIV/AIDS (STUDI KASUS KABUPATEN BANJAR)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Penggabungan data mining dengan kemampuan dalam mengelola dan mengolah database, statistika dan kecerdasan buatan telah banyak diterapkan dalam berbagai bidang. Penerapannya beragam, tergantung pada bagaimana data itu didistribusikan dan dimanfaatkan. Ada yang diterapkan di bidang kemiliteran, pendidikan, kesehatan, keuangan dan masih banyak lagi lainnya. Tujuan utama dari penelitian ini ialah untuk menganalisis jumlah kasus HIV/AIDS yang ada di Kabupaten Banjar dengan penyebaran di 20 Kecamatan didalamnya. Data yang dijadikan sumber berasal dari RSUD Ratu Zalecha Martapura. Analisis didukung dengan teknik clustering dengan pemilihan algoritma k-means dalam mengidentifikasi similaritas antar data. Jumlah kluster yang ditentukan dalam implementasi algoritma k-means adalah 3 kluster. Masing-masing kluster memiliki nilai rata-rata yang berbeda. Masing-masing kluster menunjukkan label tingkat kerawanan terjadinya HIV di tiap kecamatan yang berada di wilayah Kabupaten Banjar.Kata Kunci : Clustering, Data Mining, HIV/AIDS, Kesehatan, k-Means
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 | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.005 |
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".