MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389350177 · doi:10.32699/pasak.v1i1.5593

ANALISIS KERUSAKAN JALAN PADA RUAS JALAN RAYA JEPARA – BANGSRI KABUPATEN JEPARA DENGAN MENGGUNAKAN METODE BINA MARGA DAN PCI ( PAVEMENT CONDITION INDEX )

2023· article· id· W4389350177 on OpenAlexaff
Oktarisa Aviska Rendy, Khotibul Umam, Yayan Adi Saputro, Mochammad Qomaruddin, Tira Roesdiana

Bibliographic record

VenuePasak Jurnal Teknik Sipil dan Bangunan · 2023
Typearticle
Languageid
FieldEngineering
TopicGeotechnical and construction materials studies
Canadian institutionsEncana (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Jalan Raya Jepara - Bangsri merupakan Jalan Provinsi dan termasuk jalan yang mengalami kerusakan jalan yang cukup parah. Sehingga diperlukan adanya analisis yang mengkaji tentang beberapa jenis kerusakan jalan tersebut serta penanganan yang sesuai dengan kerusakan jalan tersebut. Berdasarkan hasil analisis yang didapat jenis kerusakan yang terjadi pada ruas Jalan Raya Jepara-Bangsri KM 16 s/d KM 18 jika ditinjau dengan metode PCI dan Bina Marga memiliki peresentasi kerusakan sebesar Retak buaya (38,75%), Retak Blok (17,39%), Retak Pinggir (8,89%), Lubang (17,49%), Tambalan (12,99%), Pengausan (10,89%), dan amblas (3,59). Untuk penilaian kondisi jalan dengan metode PCI diperoleh rata-rata sebesar 55,523 yang termasuk dalam kategori sedang (Fair), sedangkan untuk metode Bina Marga diperoleh rata-rata nilai urutan prioritas sebesar 7,2. Hasil dari keduanya memiliki jenis penanganan yang sama yaitu Pemeliharaan Rutin. Untuk menghindari kerusakan jalan yang semakin parah maka perlu adanya perhitungan mengenai rencana tebal lapis tambahan perkerasan lentur. Berdasarkan hasil jenis nomogram 3 dengan Ipt = 2,0 dan Ipo = 4 sehingga diperoleh tebal perkerasan laston AC-WC (lapis aus) tebal 7,5 cm, AC-BC (lapis antara) tebal 10 cm, dan Lapis pondasi Sirtu kelas A tebal 12 cm.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.479
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.227 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePasak Jurnal Teknik Sipil dan BangunanSame topicGeotechnical and construction materials studiesFrench-language works237,207