MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4210345090 · doi:10.32672/jse.v7i1.3829

Strategi Pengembangan Bank Sampah Sahdu Skala Kelurahan di Desa Tanimulya Kabupaten Bandung Barat

2022· article· en· W4210345090 on OpenAlexaff
Yulianti Pratama, Muhammad Rizki Kurniawan

Bibliographic record

VenueJurnal Serambi Engineering · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWaste Management and Recycling
Canadian institutionsEncana (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMunicipal solid wasteWest bankBusinessIndex (typography)Waste managementEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Out of four waste banks in the Tanimulya Village, Sahdu Waste Bank is the only proper waste bank in operation. Based on the 2019 West Bandung District’s Environmental Agency (Dinas Lingkungan Hidup Kebersihan) Strategic Plan, which stated the target in 2022, that it needs to reduce 10%, from the current 8% reduction of the waste generation through the solid waste management and waste bank facilites, prior to the landfill. One of the efforts that can be done is through the development of the Sahdu Waste Bank from the hamlet scale to the urban village scale by using the Waste Bank Indexing Method. Assessing the existing condition with the waste bank index, identification and compiling the recommendation towards parameters that need improvement. Based on the results of the assessment, a score of 53.2 (out of 100, and is considered as fairly good category), reveals 14 sub indicator that can be improved, which consist of 6 Sub Indicator of Management System, 6 Sub Indicator of Operational System, and 2 Sub Indicator of Waste Bank Facility. The value of the Sahdu Waste Bank can be increased to 88.3 (out of 100, and is considered as very good), which generates the reduction of 266.67% of waste, equal to 4 ton/month from 150 kg/month. That would make Sahdu Waste Bank contributes 1.6% from the reduction target of 10% for the West Bandung District waste.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.077

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0230.005

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.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.187
Teacher spread0.180 · 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
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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJurnal Serambi EngineeringSame topicWaste Management and RecyclingFrench-language works237,207