Bibliographic record
Abstract
Wacana tentang pemerintah daerah dan Hak Asasi Manusia (HAM) baru-baru ini menjadi topik penting dalam pertemuan-pertemuan HAM internasional. Wacana itu didorong oleh kebutuhan untuk mengimplementasikan norma dan standar HAM ke dalam praktik langsung di tingkat lokal. HAM yang sudah diakui secara internasional memiliki persoalan di tingkat pelaksanaan. Pelanggaran HAM kerap terjadi di level lokal. Memutus mata rantai pelanggaran HAM dipandang akan lebih efektif jika pada level lokal dibangun kapasitas pemerintah dalam menunaikan kewajiban HAM. Penghormatan, pemenuhan, dan perlindungan HAM akan lebih terasa dampaknya bagi masyarakat, terutama kelompok rentan jika otoritas di level lokal didorong untuk memiliki kesadaran HAM dan, dengan itu, mampu menyusun pilihan-pilihan kebijakan dan membangun praktik- praktik terbaik bagi perwujudan penikmatan HAM di tingkat lokal. Program Kota HAM adalah salah satu upaya yang diarahkan untuk membangun kapasitas pemerintah daerah dalam penegakan HAM. Program ini juga harus melibatkan sejauh mungkin partisipasi dan kapasitas politik masyarakat, sehingga Program Kota HAM menjadi milik dan dipelihara oleh publik.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.026 | 0.007 |
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".