Opportunities for Towani Tolotang Women in the Public Sphere
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Towani Tolotang community is known to be highly egalitarian and emancipative. Towani Tolotang society isopen to having leaders. Towani Tolotang women are allowed to be involved in public activities. This study aims to examine the possibilities of Towani Tolotang women in Sidrap Regency within the scope of customs that form the basis of their strength to participate in the public sphere. This study uses a qualitative research method with a descriptive type to explain the results obtained from interviews that are analyzed factually, objectively,and systematically. This research shows that the customary rules in the Towani Tolotang community in Sidrap Regency do not differentiate between male and female gender. All parties are entitled to hold the position of ordinary leader based on their lineage and character. Based on this, the patriarchal culture of Bugis society does not affect the status of women in Towani Tolotang society, giving women in Towani Tolotang society theopportunity to participate in the public sphere.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 0.001 |
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".