Responsibility of Manufacturers in Waste Management of Plastic Packaged Drink Products Based on Law Number 18 of 2008 Regarding Waste Management (Case Study in Ambon City, Maluku Province)
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
This article is motivated by the large number of irresponsible use of plastic waste in Ambon city, Maluku Province. This research is a normative legal research. The results obtained in this paper are Waste Management of plastic packaging beverage products carried out by Ambon city producers in accordance with Law Number 18 of 2008 concerning Waste. Management to reclaim packaging that has been consumed by consumers so that they can be recycled systematically, thoroughly and in a sustainable manner. and produce goods using materials that are environmentally friendly and reusable. Apart from doing this, producers are also responsible for waste management in collaboration with the Ambon City Government as stated in Article 44 paragraph (1) of Ambon City Regulation Number 11 of 2015 which includes the provision / construction of Temporary Shelters (TPS) or TPS 3R. (Reduce Reuse). , Recycling), Final Disposal Site (TPA) or Integrated Waste Processing Site (TPST), as well as supporting facilities and infrastructure, in this case providing a vehicle for transporting waste from TPS or TPS 3R to TPA or TPST, TPA or TPST management and / or management other processed products. This cooperation takes the form of sorting, collecting, transporting, processing, and / or final processing of 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.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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