MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4220828451 · doi:10.52434/jp.v14i2.30

Pengaruh Pelaksanaan Kebijakan Kepegawaian Terhadap Manajemen Pembinaan Pegawai Untuk Mewujudkan Kinerja Pegawai Badan Perencanaan Pembangunan Daerah Kabupaten Garut

2020· article· id· W4220828451 on OpenAlexaff
Yadi Kurnia

Bibliographic record

VenueJurnal Publik · 2020
Typearticle
Languageid
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEmployee Performance and Management
Canadian institutionsEncana (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsHumanitiesArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Tujuan penelitian ini untuk menganalisis pengaruh Pelaksanaan Kebijakan Kepegawaian Terhadap Manajemen Pembinaan Pegawai Untuk Mewujudkan Kinerja Pegawai Badan Perencanaan Pembangunan Daerah Kabupaten Garut. Metode penelitian yang digunakan dalam penelitian ini adalah adalah metode eksplanasi melalui teknik evaluasi. Populasi penelitian adalah seluruh Aparatur Sipil Negara pada Badan Perencanaan Pembangunan Daerah Kabupaten Garut yang terdiri dari 69 pegawai. Teknik penarikan sampel yang digunakan adalah sensus sehingga seluruh populasi dijadikan sampel. Teknik pengumpulan data melalui studi dokumentasi dan studi lapangan, meliputi observasi, angket dan wawancara. Teknik analisis data untuk menjawab hipotesis penelitian adalah analisis statistik dengan model analisis jalur (path analysis). Hasil pengujian hipotesis utama dalam penelitian ini dapat disimpulkan bahwa pelaksanaan kebijakan Kepegawaian (X) berpengaruh terhadap Manajemen Pembinaan Pegawai (Y) untuk mewujudkan kinerja Pegawai Badan Perencanaan Pembangunan Daerah Kabupaten Garut (Z). Artikel ini berkesimpulan bahwa kinerja pegawai akan terwujud apabila manejemen pembinaan pegawai dapat dioptimalkan sebagai bentuk pelaksanaan kebijakan Kepegawaian.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
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 score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.133

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0060.004
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0400.007

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.237 · 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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJurnal PublikSame topicEmployee Performance and ManagementFrench-language works237,207