MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387376949 · doi:10.59934/jaiea.v3i1.264

Classification Of Population Data On Status In The Family Based On Last Education And Work Using The Clustering Method (Case Study: Sei Prison Village Office)

2023· article· en· W4387376949 on OpenAlexaff
Fauziah Ningsih, Yani Maulita, Marto Sihombing

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Artificial Intelligence and Engineering Applications (JAIEA) · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicData Mining and Machine Learning Applications
Canadian institutionsKootenay Association for Science & Technology
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCensusPopulationCluster (spacecraft)GeographyWork (physics)Cluster analysisDemographyComputer scienceSociologyStatisticsEngineeringMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Population data is structured individual or individual data through population registration, civil registration and population census activities. It is important to know population data because in making policies and planning regional or state development, population data is needed to describe the condition of an area. Population data include births, deaths, transfers or migration, population composition, population density and so on. This grouping is done so that population data that is already in the archives will be input into an application that will be designed to make it easier for parties who need data without having to look at the data that is still manual. The problems that exist are such as the increase in the number of residents in a city, village or even a district which is increasing while the population that has been recorded still does not have a job, such as status in the family, namely the head of the family is still there who does not work in terms of recent education can still be considered to get a job that matches the last type of education. From the research process conducted on 20 data, 3 groups were obtained, Cluster 1 contained 16 data, Cluster 2 contained 1 data, and Cluster 3 contained 3 data. And the most group obtained is cluster 1, there is education last high school, has a type of work that has not worked and status in the family of the head of the family.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.080

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0060.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.103
GPT teacher head0.379
Teacher spread0.276 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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 venueJournal of Artificial Intelligence and Engineering Applications (JAIEA)Same topicData Mining and Machine Learning ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207