OPTIMASI PEMANFAATAN JALUR PEJALAN KAKI DI KAWASAN NIAGA TERPADU SUDIRMAN
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
Adanya integrasi antara fasilitas pejalan kaki dengan moda transportasi massal menjadi salahsatu daya tarik kawasan niaga terpadu Sudirman. Dengan fasilitas penunjang yang memadai,jalur pejalan kaki belum dapat mengakomodasi kegiatan dan kebutuhan pejalan kaki secaraoptimal. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk mengetahui apakah pemanfaatan jalur pejalan kakiKawasan SCBD sudah optimal sehingga dapat memfasilitasi pejalan kaki besertakegiatannya. Pendekatan penelitian campuran dengan melakukan observasi lapangan dalammenilai tingkat keoptimalan fasilitas pejalan kaki, kemudian menyimpulkan data berdasarkanstandar dan tingkat pengaruh masing–masing aspek terhadap pejalan kaki dan menyajikandata secara kuantitatif. Temuan dari penelitian ini bahwa fasilitas pejalan kaki di KawasanSCBD belum optimal karena minimnya ruang atau fasilitas sosial dan kesenjangan jumlahpejalan kaki pada jam sibuk dan di luar jam sibuk. Hasil penelitian menyimpulkan bahwapemanfaatan jalur pejalan kaki dapat dioptimalkan melalui program penyediaan fasilitas danpelebaran jalur.Kata kunci : Jalur Pejalan Kaki, Kawasan Niaga Terpadu, Aktivitas Pejalan Kaki
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) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.009 |
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