Determining The Selection Of Departments At Abdi Negara Vocational School Using The Additive Ratio Assessment (Aras) Method
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
Along with the occurrence of competition and the development of technology and information in the current era of globalization requires skilled and ready-to-use human resources in the world of work. The efforts made are to improve the quality of education in Indonesia which always receives attention from various parties. One way to improve education is to determine the right majors at Vocational High Schools (SMK). The differences in each student with a different background must be considered because they can determine whether student achievement is good or bad. In ddition, the decision also greatly influences the alternative process chosen, especially in choosing the concentration of majors that are in accordance with the skills and expertise of students. Based on the author's observations at ABDI NEGARA VOCATIONAL SCHOOL through data collection both by conducting interviews and through available documents, the reasons students choose majors are usually based on student parents' references, besides that due to trend reasons (most students take that major). Therefore, through research using Decision Support Systems, it is hoped that it can provide recommendations to find out which majors to choose according to the interests or abilities of each student. So that there are no problems regarding failure or dropping out of school (drop out).
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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