Power Relations Urang Pandai and Candidate on Regional Head Election in West Sumatra, Indonesia
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
The transformation in the election of regional heads from indirect to direct since 2005 brought many changes to the dynamics of local politics in Indonesia. One of these changes is the opening up of opportunities for community members as candidates for regional heads and the strengthening of power relations between candidates and urang pandai. A clearer understanding of the position of urang pandai in West Sumatra will help stakeholders in the election to map out the forces that will support a higher-quality election. This research uses the historical method. There are four stages in the historical method, namely; heuristics, source criticism, interpretation, and historiography. The results of this study reveal two typologies of urang pandai in Minangkabau culture involved in the election of regional heads, namely the sufi healer, and orang berakuan. Direct regional head election regulations lead to intense competition between candidates. The amount of material sacrifice and strong pressure to win encourages candidates to find someone who has magical abilities and is placed as a spiritual mentor and political advisor. Wirid, tahlilan (reading prayers), pilgrimage to the grave, giving prayers, terawangan (divination) and the use jimat (amulets) are the practice of power relations between people and candidates.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 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