Deliberasi dalam Perencanaan Pembangunan Infrastuktur Nagari Kunangan Parit Rantang, Kecamatan Kamang Baru pada Masa Covid-19
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Artikel ini membahas proses deliberatif untuk membuat hasil berupa kesepakatan yang dijadikan kebijakan atau dasar rencana pengelolaan suatu entitas pemerintahan. Fokus penelitian meliputi empat hal, pertama, Proses Deliberasi Dalam Perencanaan Pembangunan Nagari Kunangan Parit Rantang, kedua, Kelompok Yang Dilibatkan Dalam Musrenbang Nagari Kunangan Parit Rantang, ketiga, Indikator Keberhasilan Pelaksanaan Musrenbang, dan keempat, Perbedaan Pelaksanaan Musrenbang Di Nagari Kunangan Parit Rantang Pada Masa Sebelum Pandemi dan Saat Pandemi. Tujuan dari penelitian ini adalah untuk mengetahui bagaimana partisipasi masyarakat dalam musyawarah pembangunan infrastruktur Nagari Kunangan Parit Rantang, Kecamatan Kamang Baru pada masa pandemi covid-19. Pandemic covid-19 mempengaruhi jumlah skala pembangunan infrastruktur di Nagari Kunangan Parit Rantang, Kecamatan Kamang Baru. Metode penelitian ini menggunakan metodeIkualitatif yang dikembangkan melalui sebuah fenomena dan didukung oleh pendapat para ahli dengan menggunakan data yang telah diperoleh sebelumnya. Kesimpulan yang didapat dalam penelitian ini ialah, pemahaman demokrasi deliberatif dalam pembangunan infrastruktur yang ada di Nagari Kunangan Parit Rantang Kecamatan Kamang Baru.
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 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 | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.043 | 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 teacher head, 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".