MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391553452 · doi:10.32315/jlbi.v5i4.223

Sistem Pengolahan Sampah pada Permukiman Industri Studi Kasus: RW 02 dan RW 12 Kelurahan Cigondewah Kaler, Kecamatan Cigondewah, Kota Bandung

2016· article· id· W4391553452 on OpenAlexaff
Dadang Hartabela, Nurjirah Bakri, Dewi R. Syahriyah, Saiful Anwar

Bibliographic record

VenueJurnal Lingkungan Binaan Indonesia · 2016
Typearticle
Languageid
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicArchitectural and Urban Studies
Canadian institutionsEncana (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pengolahan sampah yang baik merupakan hal penting bagi siapapun guna menjamin kualitas kesehatan pada suatu permukiman. Riset ini dilakukan untuk mengetahui sistem pengolahan sampah yang terjadi pada permukiman industri, baik secara mandiri maupun dengan bantuan pihak lain. Penelitian dilakukan dengan metode kualitatif deskriptif, yaitu dengan menguraikan atau menjelaskan suatu fenomena yang terjadi. Adapun populasi pada penelitian ini ialah masyarakat dan wilayah permukiman di RW 02 dan RW 12. Penentuan sampel dilakukan dengan teknik random sampling, yaitu teknik pemilihan sampel terhadap siapa saja yang ditemui tim peneliti pada saat penelitian. Hasil riset menemukan bahwa terdapat dua jenis limbah di permukiman industri Kelurahan Cigondewah Kaler ini, yaitu limbah organik dan anorganik. Limbah anorganik dapat dibedakan ke dalam tiga kelompok, yaitu sampah tekstil, sampah plastik, dan sampah kardus. Permasalahan limbah anorganik tersebut diatasi oleh warga dengan cara pemilahan (sorting) kemudian dijual ke pihak lain. Sedangkan untuk limbah organik, masyarakat kampung Cigondewah belum melakukan upaya Pengolahan

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.046
Threshold uncertainty score0.091

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.005

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.194 · 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 designQualitative
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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJurnal Lingkungan Binaan IndonesiaSame topicArchitectural and Urban StudiesFrench-language works237,207