QUALITY ANALYSIS OF THE FARINA BEAUTY CLINIC MOBILE APPLICATION USING THE SERVICE QUALITY (SERVQUAL) METHOD
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
Farina Beauty Clinic is one of the beauty clinics which is a beauty clinic in Karawang that handles facial and body skin beauty problems. Farina Beauty Clinic really prioritizes customer satisfaction so that they always look beautiful, healthy and youthful in accordance with the expectations and desires of customers as well as current trends. which was adopted by Farina who already exists at Farina Beauty Clinic, namely Farina Beauty Clinic Mobile. This study aims to determine the level of quality and the factors that drive the Farina Beauty Clinic Mobile application using the Service Quality (Servqual) method. The sampling method used in this research is Non-Probability Sampling with purposive sampling technique, with the number of respondents as many as 158 respondents. The results of this study indicate that all indicators X1, X2, X3, X3, X4 and X5 on the t test and the successive test have a significant effect on the user's application quality because they have a sign value of 0.001 t Table. Farina Beauty Clinic is expected to be able to maintain indicators that have satisfied its performance and improve low performance attributes so that users are satisfied with the performance provided by Farina Beauty Clinic to users.
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 | 0.005 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 it