MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4381621838 · doi:10.31315/psb.v4i1.8902

Evaluasi Kesesuaian Lahan Tanaman Jati Pada Bekas Tambang di Dusun Girigondo, Kalurahan Kaligintung, Kapanewon Temon, Kabupaten Kulon Progo, D.I. Yogyakarta

2023· article· id· W4381621838 on OpenAlexaff
Athifah Putristya, Herwin Lukito, Ika Wahyuning Widiarti

Bibliographic record

VenueProsiding Seminar Nasional Teknik Lingkungan Kebumian SATU BUMI · 2023
Typearticle
Languageid
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Growth and Agriculture Techniques
Canadian institutionsEncana (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsForestryPhysicsGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Kegiatan Pertambangan di Dusun Girigondo, Kalurahan Kaligintung, Kapanewon Temon, Kabupaten Kulon Progo, Daerah Istimewa Yogyakarta ditinggalkan tanpa melakukan pengelolaan sehingga memunculkan kerusakan lingkungan dan tidak produktifnya suatu lahan. Penelitian ini dilakukan guna mengetahui dan mengevaluasi kesesuaian lahan peruntukan tanaman jati pada lahan bekas pertambangan. Metode yang digunakan dalam penelitian yaitu (1) metode survei dan pemetaan, (2) metode purposive sampling berdasarkan satuan medan, (3) analisis laboratorium, (4) metode matching. Parameter yang digunakan untuk evaluasi kesesuaian lahan yaitu : Temperatur (t), Lama bulan kering (bk), Curah Hujan/Tahun (ch), Drainase/Permeabilitas (d), Tekstur (tt), Kedalaman Tanah (kt), pH Tanah (ph), Salinitas (s), Batuan di permukaan (bd), Singkapan Batuan (sb), Bahaya Erosi (be), Kemiringan Lereng (kl), Bahaya Banjir (bb). Hasil evaluasi kesesuaian lahan bekas tambang untuk tanaman jati menunjukkan bahwa semua satuan medan tergolong dalam kelas N2 (tidak sesuai selamanya) dengan faktor pembatas secara keseluruhan berupa d, kt, bd, sb, be, kl.Kata Kunci: Lahan Bekas Pertambangan; Kerusakan Lingkungan; Evaluasi Lahan; Kesesuaian Lahan; Tanaman Jati

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.028
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.229 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProsiding Seminar Nasional Teknik Lingkungan Kebumian SATU BUMISame topicPlant Growth and Agriculture TechniquesFrench-language works237,207