MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3184985965 · doi:10.31004/abdidas.v2i4.357

Pelatihan Pemanfaatan Sistem Informasi Pelaporan Retribusi Sampah

2021· article· id· W3184985965 on OpenAlexaff
Nuraida Latif, Syaharullah Disa, Ratnawati Ratnawati, Agus Halid, Andi Sumardin, A.Yulia Muniar, Wisda Wisda

Bibliographic record

VenueJurnal Abdidas · 2021
Typearticle
Languageid
FieldComputer Science
TopicEdcuational Technology Systems
Canadian institutionsKootenay Association for Science & Technology
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sistem pelaporan retribusi sampah yang ada saat ini di Kecamatan Manggala Kota Makassar, masih menggunakan sistem pelaporan retribusi sampah secara manual, yaitu pada saat pelaporan retribusi sampah dilaporkan pada petugas penagih retribusi sampah, dan harus melakukan pelaporan langsung ke kepala seksi kebersihan dengan membawa catatan hasil laporan tagihan retribusi sampah yang ditulis secara manual. Hal ini akan mempersulit proses pelaporan terhadap penagih yang dilakukan setiap bulan, karena data tidak sesuai hasil dari tagihan yang dicatat dilapangan karena sering terjadi kehilangan data. Oleh karena itu perlu adanya sistem untuk memudahkan penagih retribusi sampah dan mengefisienkan waktu dan biaya, sehingga proses pelaporan retribusi sampah lebih efiseian dibandingkan dengan pelaporan secara manual. Metode yang digunakan dalam kegiatan ini adalah metode ceramah dan metode tutorial. Hasil dari pengabdian masyarakat ini yaitu para pegawai kebersihan & pertanaman sangat merespon dengan adanya sistem informasi pelaporan retribusi sampah yaitu mereka langsung mengimplementasikan di Kantor Kelurahan Manggala untuk pelaporan retribusi sampah.

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)0.005
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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.085
Threshold uncertainty score0.284

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0060.005
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0850.049

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.233 · 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
GenreOther

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

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJurnal AbdidasSame topicEdcuational Technology SystemsFrench-language works237,207