Modeling of citizen science cluster in making decision for readiness towards bogor smart village: An application of fuzzy c-means algorithm
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
The construction of smart villages has begun in many Indonesian villages, along with the advancement of technology and local economic growth. Villagers must participate in constructing the smart economy-smart village by becoming familiar with the characteristics of the village's inhabitants using the citizen science model. This study intends to categorize villagers so that researchers can assess and decide their level of readiness for a smart economy in an ecosystem based on a smart village. Clustering is required to find communities of residents who are ready based on their traits. Using fuzzy C-Means with a Davied Bouldin Index value of 0.129, the data were divided into 4 clusters. The most important variables were chosen using information from the test's 300 responders, and the Kaiser Mayer Olkin assumption of 0.975 was used to validate the results. Our paper provides new information on how smart village readiness is assessed by the citizen science cluster. It was decided to divide residents into four groups: those who are less prepared (24.33%), those who are somewhat prepared (29.33%), those who are ready ( 25.67%) %), those who are ready (level of participatory knowledge), and those who are very ready for the smart economy (20.67%) based on the cluster model.
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 | 0.007 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it