MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387377172 · doi:10.59934/jaiea.v3i1.278

Grouping Data On Infrastructure Development In Langkat District Using The Clustering Method (Case Study: PUPR, Langkat Regency)

2023· article· en· W4387377172 on OpenAlexaff
Diva Alifya, Relita Buaton, Suci Ramadani

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
KeywordsCluster analysisService (business)BusinessComputer scienceMarketingArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A building is a man-made structure consisting of walls and a roof permanently erected in a place. Buildings can also be called houses and buildings, namely all facilities, infrastructure or infrastructure in culture as well as human life in building their civilization. Public Works and Public Housing (PUPR) play an important role in increasing the development of national infrastructure in Indonesia so that PUPR can assist in clustering research in infrastructure development in Langkat Regency which is very large every year by grouping the data based on activity names, company names, sub-districts development, and look at the last four years.To classify existing development infrastructure in Langkat Regency with the previous system used by the PUPR Service which is still running by recording in a ledger and hindering reporting performance in grouping PUPR service infrastructure development in road construction, bridge construction and others. So that the existence of grouping using the clustering method helps the PUPR service in clustering infrastructure development data in Langkat Regency to be more effective and efficient.The clustering method is one of the methods that can be applied in classifying infrastructure development data taken from the analysis of Langkat Regency PUPR data regarding developments that have taken place in several sub-districts in Langkat Regency. This clustering method has been widely used by previous studies to group data

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)0.002
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.089
Threshold uncertainty score0.177

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.090
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.274 · 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 venueJournal of Artificial Intelligence and Engineering Applications (JAIEA)Same topicData Mining and Machine Learning ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207