RENCANA TATA BANGUNAN DAN LINGKUNGAN (RTBL) DALAM MENATA RUANG KOTA
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
Urban society has a placed a considerable amount of hope in and holds great expectations of the Urban Planning Program (RTRWK) on RTRWK as the solution to urban planning problems. This program serves as a general guideline for urban planning, although much more detailed regulations are certainly required. The Building and Developmental Planning Program (RTBL) contains urban planning regulations that are in fact already in place despite its being much less popular and/or well known compared to its counterparts: RTRWK or even RDTR (Detailed Urban Space Management Program). Urban and environmental development planning can be one of the solutions for urban management and regulations in accordance with Law No. 26 of 2007 concerning Urban Planning, as well as government regulations for urban planning management. In this study, attempts are made to describe and explain how RTBL can be utilized as a so-called tandem solution to certain urban planning problems, after taking into consideration that various urban areas have distinct characteristics and priorities.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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 it