Bibliographic record
Abstract
Indonesian elections are a real expression of democracy and a vehicle for the people to declare their sovereignty over the state and government. Elections are based on Pancasila and the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia. Elections are held in the Unitary State of the Republic of Indonesia (NKRI) based on the principles of direct, universal, free, confidential, honest and fair elections. Political participation in a democratic country is an indicator of the implementation of the highest legitimacy of state power by the people (people's sovereignty), which is manifested in participation in democratic parties (elections). It can be said that general elections are one of the means of democracy and a manifestation of people's sovereignty, to produce representatives and leaders who are ambitious, competent and responsible for the welfare of the people. A very interesting group of voters to follow and learn more about is first-time voters. New voters are voters who are voting for the first time in an election. The purpose of this research is to find out the forms of political participation of new voters in elections, the factors that support the political participation of new voters in elections, and the factors that hinder the political participation of new voters in elections. The writing method used in this journal article is a literature review supported by relevant research. New voters are expected to be more actively involved in political activities, dividing their time between studying.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.028 | 0.007 |
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".