MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4254495234 · doi:10.21009/spatial.171.07

[no title]

2017· article· W4254495234 on OpenAlexaff
Ahmad Haerison

Bibliographic record

VenueJurnal SPATIAL Wahana Komunikasi dan Informasi Geografi · 2017
Typearticle
Language
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine and Coastal Ecosystems
Canadian institutionsWiLAN (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeographyForestry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Kabupaten Pesisir Barat yang terletak pada sepanjang pesisir barat wilayah Lampung merupakan wilayah yang berkaitan erat dengan pengembangan biota-biota laut. Perlindungan dari biota-biota laut tersebut yaitu dalam hal perlindungan terhadap ekosistem terumbu karang. Salah satu upaya dalam perlindungan ekosistem tersebut dapat berupa rehabilitasi untuk mengembalikan keberadaan dan kondisi ekosistem tersebut. Tujuan dari penelitian Terumbu Karang Kabupaten Pesisir Barat ini adalah untuk mengetahui kondisi terumbu karang yang ada di Kabupaten Pesisir Barat dan aplikasi ekowisata bahari terhadap kondisi terumbu karang yang ada. Metode yang digunakan dalam penelitian ini yaitu: 1) Studi literatur; 2) Pengambilan data dengan menggunakan metode transek garis (LIT); 3) Analisa data. Pengambilan data dilakukan pada 3 kecamatan di Kabupaten Pesisir Barat, yaitu Kecamatan Pesisir Selatan, Kecamatan Ngambur dan Kecamatan Bengkunat. Berdasarkan hasil dari penelitian didapatkan tutpan karang hidup di Kecamatan Pesisir Selatan sebesar 33%, di Kecamatan Ngambur 45% dan Kecamatan Bengkunat sebesar 36,6%. Dari ketiga data diatas dapat diambil kesimpulan bahwa kondisi terumbu karang di Kabupaten Pesisir Barat masuk dalam kondisi sedang, untuk kondisi terumbu karang yang demikian sangat baik dilakukan penerapan konsep ekowisata bahari dalam proses pengembangan penggelolaan wilayah pesisir. Pengembangan potensi ekowisata bahari pada wilayah pesisir Kabupaten Pesisir Barat dilakukan bukan berdasarkan longitudinal section akan tetapi juga dikembangkan juga dengan potongan cross section.  

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Open science, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Open science, Research integrity
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.562
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0210.004
Scholarly communication0.0110.016
Open science0.0130.018
Research integrity0.0010.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.222 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJurnal SPATIAL Wahana Komunikasi dan Informasi GeografiSame topicMarine and Coastal EcosystemsFrench-language works237,207