Sustainable Waterfront Development sebagai Strategi Penataan Kembali Kawasan Bantaran Sungai
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Bantaran sungai yang tidak tertata dapat menimbulkan banyak permasalahan. Banyaknya perumahan illegal di sekitar bantaran sungai mengakibatkan bukan hanya menyebabkan menyempitnya daerah aliran sungai, namun juga menurunkan kualitas hidup masyarakatnya. Untuk itu, penataan kembali (redevelopment) penting dilakukan untuk dapat menata kembali kawasan bantaran sungai dan daerah disekitarnya. Tujuan dari penelitian ini adalah untuk memberikan solusi pada penataan kawasan bantaran sungai. Studi kasus pada penelitian ini adalah daerah bantaran sungai Ciliwung segmen Kampung Melayu. Penataan bantaran sungai yang berkelanjutan dapat dilakukan dengan menghadirkan konsep desain yang berkelanjutan, kontrol terhadap air, dan pembangunan mengarah ke sungai. Keberlanjutan dari kawasan bantaran sungai dapat dilakukan dengan menghadirkan kawasan yang aktif sehingga dapat menjadi pusat aktifitas masyarakat yang pada akhirnya menimbulkan rasa memiliki.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.019 | 0.003 |
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".