The role of community protection institution in disaster management at West Java, Indonesia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This research aimed to establish a mechanism of evolution of community protection, identify the support of facilities and infrastructure needed in facilitating the implementation of the tasks and functions of Linmas, especially in disaster management and formulate community protection institutions that are appropriate to the needs and capacities of the regions. The research method is carried out by a qualitative approach that is using focus group discussion (FGD) based on experience and perceptions of the benefits and impacts of the community protection unit's guidance in West Java province. The results show that the community protection institutions are needed in improving the independence of the community in tackling any disaster that is faced by an organization in which at least have the ability and skills in the field: early prevention, peace and orderly of safety fibre, health and psychologist and public and social work. The practical implication of this research is that the local government should empower the community protection unit through the regional work unit or related stakeholders in conducting training and facilitation of training and improving skills so that they can carry out their duties better.
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 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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".