EVALUASI KONSEP PENGEMBANGAN TAMAN BISNIS BERDASARKAN KARAKTERISTIK KAWASAN CAMPURAN
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mixed-use development has become common in many major cities around the world. The use of mixed-use development has also occurred in Indonesia since the 2000s, with the Jakarta Metropolitan Urban Area being one of the cities that has implemented it extensively. The implementation is intended to address urban issues caused by uncontrolled urbanization, such as traffic congestion, the need for proper housing, and the issue of limited land. One of the efforts for land efficiency and becoming a compact and sustainable city is the concept of mixed area development. One of the business areas that has been transformed from a warehouse area to a mixed area is CIBIS Business Park, which spans approximately 12 hectares and is located in the South Jakarta Administrative City area. Mixed area development should ideally meet all of the criteria for mixed area characteristics, but it turns out that there are many mixed area developments that do not meet the mixed area characteristic criteria, resulting in new problems both in the mixed area and surrounding it. The purpose of this study is to evaluate whether the CIBIS Business Park's concept of mixed-use development meets the criteria for mixed-use characteristics, specifically the diversity of use criteria and design criteria. The research method used in this study is quantitative research, and the evaluation method is based on the plan's concept (ex-ante evaluation). This evaluation method compares the CIBIS Business Park area's site plan to the criteria for mixed-use development characteristics, specifically the diversity of use criteria and design criteria. According to the evaluation results, the CIBIS Business Park development concept in general conforms to the characteristics of a mixed area, with 71.42% meeting the criteria for diversity of use and 57.14% meeting the design criteria
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.020 | 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".