MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4285317944 · doi:10.37108/shaut.v13i1.426

GURU TEUPA KUJANG “ABAH WAHYU”: SEBUAH SEJARAH LISAN

2021· article· en· W4285317944 on OpenAlexaff
Sri Wulan, Muthia Nurhayati

Bibliographic record

VenueShaut Al-Maktabah Jurnal Perpustakaan Arsip dan Dokumentasi · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCultural and Artistic Studies
Canadian institutionsEncana (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSuccessor cardinalJavaMathematics educationGeographySociologyComputer sciencePsychologyMathematicsProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study aims to reveal the knowledge possessed by a Teupa teacher to share information about what and how to make Kujang which is widely known as a typical weapon from West Java. The Teupa teacher who was an informant in this study was Wahyu Affandi Suradinata from Bogor, better known as Abah Wahyu. Through a qualitative method with a descriptive approach it is hoped that it can convey straightforwardly about the profession of a Teupa Kujang Teacher. In-depth interviews were conducted in November 2014 and then supplemented with other supporting references. The results of the study show that the dedication of Abah Wahyu for 26 years made Kujang qualified as a Teupa Teacher so that he could become an example and worthy of being emulated by the next generation, then it is hoped that there will be a successor so that the cultural wealth especially related to Kujang does not become extinct. Through this study, we are really hope to capture the oral history of a Teupa Kujang teacher that is useful for the general public and cultural enthusiasts in particular so the preservation of the existence of Kujang can be maintained.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.295 · 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 designQualitative
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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueShaut Al-Maktabah Jurnal Perpustakaan Arsip dan DokumentasiSame topicCultural and Artistic StudiesFrench-language works237,207