MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Pemetaan Komoditas Basis di Kecamatan Polongbangkeng Utara Kabupaten Takalar

2021· article· en· W4206340949 on OpenAlexaff
Muhammad Anshar, Irsyadi Siradjuddin

Bibliographic record

VenueJurnal Tataloka · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicFood and Agricultural Sciences
Canadian institutionsEncana (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCommodityCropAgricultural scienceResource (disambiguation)BusinessAgricultural economicsGeographyEnvironmental scienceForestryEconomicsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The policy for commodity development in Polongbakeng Utara District has not been able to optimize its natural resource potential. One of the efforts to optimize this potential is the identification of food crops basis commodities by potential mapping in each village in Polongbangkeng Utara District. This study aims to identify the food crops commodity which is a basis commodity and to make the basis commodities mapping in Polongbangkeng Utara District. The analytical method used is LQ analysis and Ar-GIS mapping. The results showed that the food crops commodities which were the basis commodities in Polongbangkeng Utara District were rice, corn, green beans, cassava and sweet potatoes. Palleko is a village that has the most basis commodities with 4 basis commodities, namely rice, green beans, cassava and sweet potato. Rice and sweet potato commodities are the most basis commodities because they are the basis for 12 villages out of 18 villages in Polongbangkeng Utara district. Base commodity mapping was carried out on 5 food crop commodities. Mapping results show that there are more non-basis commodity polygons (50 polygons) than basis commodity polygons (40 polygons).

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.048

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.001

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.189 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJurnal TatalokaSame topicFood and Agricultural SciencesFrench-language works237,207