KAJIAN AWAL PERENCANAAN BANGUNAN PELINDUNG PANTAI LABUHAN JUKUNG, KRUI, KABUPATEN PESISIR BARAT, PROVINSI LAMPUNG
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Berdasarkan dokumen Rencana Strategis Pengelolaan Wilayah Pesisir Provinsi Lampung (2000) diketahui telah terjadi erosi/abrasi dan sedimentasi di wilayah pesisir Provinsi Lampung. Salah satu wilayah pesisir yang rentan mengalami proses erosi adalah pantai Krui yang merupakan pantai wisata. Lokasi pantai Labuhan Jukung Krui berhadapan langsung dengan Samudera Hindia. Peneliti berpendapat perlu dilakukan kajian awal tentang kondisi hidro-oceanografi dan struktur pelindung pantai yang sesuai dengan fungsi pantai di lokasi penelitian. Data angin yang digunakan dalam peramalan gelombang pada penelitian ini bersumber dari ECMWV, sedangkan untuk data kedalaman perairan digunakan peta batimetri yang diproduksi oleh DISHIDROS TNI-AL. Berdasarkan peramalan gelombang, diketahui bahwa tinggi gelombang ekstrim di lokasi studi mencapai 6,04 meter untuk periode ulang 25 tahun. Gelombang tersebut dapat menjadi ancaman bagi area sekitar pantai, sehingga peneliti berpendapat struktur groin dan atau submerged breakwater merupakan pilihan yang tepat untuk pantai wisata Labuhan Jukung, Krui. Elevasi puncak groin adalah 10.3 meter dari dasar perairan.Kata Kunci : gelombang, erosi, groin, submeged breakwater
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.021 | 0.003 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".