Konsep Pengembangan Kawasan REBANA: Memisahkan Fungsionalitas dan Branding Pengembangan Kawasan
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
Abstract. The development of the REBANA area is closely related to the large-scale development of industrial areas with all their negative impacts on the environment. In fact, a concept called Polycentric Smart Region is ready to be implemented for regional development to support environmental desires while still making regional connectivity the biggest factor in regional attractiveness. The data collection method used in this research is literature study with content analysis as the analysis method. The results obtained are that the Polycentric Smart Region Development Concept can be a solution to the REBANA Area development issues because of the planned grouping of cities, relying on regional connectivity, and limiting development in non-urban areas. Abstrak. Pengembangan Kawasan REBANA sangat erat kaitannya dengan pembangunan kawasan industri secara besar-besaran dengan semua dampak negatifnya terhadap lingkungan. Padahal, sebuah konsep bernama Polycentric Smart Region siap diterapkan untuk pengembangan kawasan demi mendukung keberlanjutan lingkungan hidup dengan tetap menjadikan konektivitas wilayah sebagai faktor terbesar daya tarik kawasan. Metode pengumpulan data yang digunakan dalam penelitian ini adalah studi literatur dengan analisis isi (content analysis) sebagai metode analisis. Hasil yang diperoleh adalah bahwa Konsep Pengembangan Polycentric Smart Region dapat menjadi penyelesaian bagi isu-isu pengembangan Kawasan REBANA karena adanya pengelompokan kota yang terencana, bertumpu pada konektivitas wilayah, dan membatasi perkembangan di daerah non-perkotaan.
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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 it