MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4248672194 · doi:10.31237/osf.io/w3xta

Ketahanan Ekonomi Rumah Tangga Pertanian di Wilayah Terkena Erupsi Merapi 2010 Melalui Indeks Standar Hidup yang Disesuaikan (Studi Kasus Tahun 2012)

2020· preprint· id· W4248672194 on OpenAlexaff
Muhamad Fathul Muin

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageid
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic Growth and Fiscal Policies
Canadian institutionsWiLAN (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Gunung Merapi merupakan kawasan strategis pertanian. Namun erupsi pada 26 Oktober 2010 telah memberikan pengaruh negatif terhadap perekonomian petani setempat. Oleh karena itu, penelitian ini akan mengkaji standar hidup praerupsi, evaluasi capaian pemulihan/ketahanan ekonomi, perbandingan capaian pemulihan/ketahanan ekonomi, serta identifikasi dimensi pembeda capaian pemulihan/ketahanan ekonomi pada rumah tangga pertanian terkena erupsi. Berdasarkan pendekatan standar hidup dengan Indeks Standar Hidup yang Disesuaikan (ISHD) serta dengan analisis uji t satu populasi, uji t populasi berpasangan, dan analisis varians (ANOVA), diketahui bahwa rumah tangga pertanian di wilayah terkena erupsi Merapi 2010 memiliki standar hidup yang rendah pada saat praerupsi. Namun demikian, rumah tangga tersebut justru memiliki ketahanan ekonomi ketika menghadapi shock bencana erupsi. Selain itu, perbandingan antar kabupaten menunjukkan bahwa terdapat perbedaan ketahanan ekonomi rumah tangga yang diakibatkan oleh perbedaan capaian dimensi bantuan sosial. Namun berdasarkan dimensi pendapatan, aset non-usaha dan aset usaha menunjukkan bahwa ketahanan ekonomi rumah tangga pertanian relatif sama antar kabupaten.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.047

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.002

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.182 · 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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEconomic Growth and Fiscal PoliciesFrench-language works237,207