EVALUASI PENCEGAHAN KEBAKARAN GEDUNG PADA KANTOR KANWIL BEA DAN CUKAI KOTA SORONG
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dengan perkembangan yang cepat muncul peningkatan risiko kebakaran. Tujuan dari penelitian ini adalah untuk mengetahui penerapan sistem proteksi aktif dan pasif, serta fasilitas penyelamatan, dan kondisi sistem keamanan gedung terhadap bahaya kebakaran di Gedung Kantor Bea dan Cukai Kota Sorong. Data primer dikumpulkan langsung di lapangan, sedangkan data sekunder diperoleh melalui otoritas terkait, termasuk Kanwil Bea dan Cukai Kota Sorong. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan sistem pengamanan gedung di Kantor Wilayah Bea dan Cukai Kota Sorong mengalami tantangan sebesar 87,56%, dengan tingkat kendala sistem proteksi aktif sebesar 16,70% dari 24% dan tingkat kendala sistem proteksi pasif sebesar 24,89% dari 26%. Hal ini menunjukkan bahwa nilai keandalan bangunan tersebut baik dan sesuai dengan ketentuan yang berlaku; namun masih terdapat kekurangan pada komponen sistem proteksi aktif, diantaranya dua sub komponen yang masuk dalam kategori kurang yaitu hidran gedung yang tidak ada di dalam gedung dan APAR yang jumlahnya masih kurang.
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 | 0.011 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.026 | 0.004 |
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".