TIPOLOGI PERMUKIMAN DI INDONESIA: PENJEJANGAN, DIKOTOMI, KONTEKS SOSIAL DAN SPASIAL
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Jenjang permukiman di Indonesia memiliki keberagaman yang mengacu kepada istilah lokal. Generalisasi terjadi ketika sebuah organisasi yang disebut negara berdiri dengan undang-undang yang mengatur penamaan hierarki tersebut. Tulisan ini mencoba melihat bagaimana teori hierarki permukiman secara umum dalam konteks global menjadi dasar dalam pengelompokan jenjang permukiman yang ada di Indonesia. Mixed-methods systematic review digunakan sebagai metodologi penelitian, dengan mengumpulkan dan mengevaluasi penelitian yang berfokus pada hierarki permukiman. Diawali dengan menetapkan tujuan penelitian berserta tipe evidence; dilanjutkan dengan pencarian literatur berdasarkan kategori yang ditetapkan; Selanjutnya penilaian studi; dan mengelompokkan temuan tersebut; dan diakhiri dengan menetapkan dan menyimpulkan temuan sebagai koteks atau hasil ulasan. Hasil penelitian ini berupa pen-tipe-an hierarki pemrukiman tradisional yaitu; Tipe pertama disebut kelompok pertanian, kelompok ini terbentuk dalam konteks kegiatan bertahan hidup dengan keluarga inti; Tipe kedua disebut kelompok bermukim; sebagai upaya menjaga tradisi dan kebudayaan dalam satu kekerabatan; Tipe ketiga berupa kumpulan kelompok bermukim (kelompok suku) yang berdasarkan pada satu garis keturunan yang lebih jauh; Tipe keempat disebut kumpulan kelompok suku (kelompok adat), kumpulan dari kampung atau persukuan tadi membentuk hierarki yang lebih tinggi; Sedangkan Tipe berikutnya di atas kampung jenjang tersebut mulai samar, karena tidak banyak daerah yang memiliki hierarki yang di atas kampung.TYPOLOGY OF SETTLEMENT IN INDONESIA: HIERARCHY, DICHOTOMY, SOCIAL CONTEXT, AND SPATIALThe hierarchy of settlement in Indonesia has a diversity that refers to local terms. Generalization occurs when an organization called a state exists with laws governing the establishment of the hierarchy. This paper tries to see how the general settlement hierarchy theory in a global context becomes the basis for classifying settlement levels in Indonesia. The mixed-methods systematic review is used as a research methodology by collecting and evaluating research focusing on settlement hierarchies. Beginning with determining the research objectives along with the type of evidence; followed by a literature search based on the defined category; Further assessment studies; grouping the findings, and ending by establishing and concluding the findings as to the context or results of the review. The results of this study are in the form of typing the traditional settlement hierarchy; namely, The first type is called the agricultural group. This group is formed in the context of survival activities with the nuclear family. The second type is called a resident group as an effort to maintain tradition and culture in one kinship. The third type is a collection of settled groups (tribal groups) based on a more distant lineage. The fourth type is called a collection of tribal groups (customary groups), where the collection of villages or tribes forms a higher hierarchy. The next type above the village level is starting to be vague because not many areas have an order above the village.
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 | 0.010 | 0.025 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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.
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".