Ecological Perspective Based on “Asta Bumi” Philosophy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study is to describe the ecological perspective of the people of Megati Traditional Village, Selemadeg District, Tabanan Regency, regarding spatial planning of traditional Balinese buildings based on the Asta Bumi philosophy.This type of research is quantitative descriptive research with a survey method and the Rasch model approach with the help of the WinStep version 3.73 application.The population in this study were heads of families in the Megati traditional village using a random cluster sampling technique.The result is that most people have traditional Balinese building types based on the Asta Bumi philosophy, and the completeness of the buildings still varies.Respondents with low levels of education believe that traditional buildings have been built that way since ancient times and are ancestral heritage.They need to fully understand the ecological meaning of the Asta Bumi philosophy, even though the community has implemented it in building homes and feeling comfortable.Respondents with a higher level of education understand more about traditional buildings.However, they tend to only apply the Asta Bumi philosophy in building houses if they are constrained by land ownership for traditional buildings based on the Asta Bumi philosophy.In conclusion, there are different views on applying the Asta Bumi philosophy between respondents with higher and lower education due to differences in understanding and level of education.So it is necessary to have government policies and related parties to provide a broad and sustainable understanding to the community.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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".