Local Identity in Traditional food Packaging As Regional Identity. (Case Study: Gabin Biscuit Packaging in Samarinda)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: The main objective of this manuscript is to determine the typical icons of the city of Samarinda which will be applied in the visual appearance of traditional food packaging as souvenirs. Theoretical framework: The function of packaging has evolved along with packaging developments and technology. From its initial function as a container, one of its functions is to display the identity of the region where the product comes from through its visual appearance. Method: This research uses a mix method. Initial data was obtained from the questionnaire and then discussed through FGD involving experts in the fields of history, tourism and design. Next, it is processed with the NVivo application to illustrate the decision framework of the analysis results by coding the data according to a classification scheme that allows identification of regional icons that will be applied in packaging. Findings: Samarinda traditional icons which were obtained would be displayed on the packaging. They are the religious, culinary, bahari and shopping tourism groups, which are revealed in the form of shopping tourism icons, fauna, typical motifs, taglines, religious tourism, marine tourism, natural tourism and infrastructure. Research, Practical & Social implications: This paper will be useful for parties of similar interest, especially in the Samarinda area, who want to design souvenir packaging that displays regional identity in its visual appearance. Originality/value: Icons typical of Samarinda which can be displayed in souvenir packaging so that they can act as ambassadors for the region.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".