Cultural Semiotics of the Use of Jidur, Terbang, and Kendhang in Dolalak Dance: A Symbolic Analysis of Specific Instruments
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The musical instruments in Dolalak dance; jidur, terbang, and kendhang, have become the main subject in the attempt to understand the essence flowing within each musical call and dance vibration. The presence of these instruments is not merely as accompaniment, but rather imbues the space with profound meaning. Questions arise: Why were these instruments chosen? Are they related to cultural values or hidden beliefs? This research is structured with a descriptive qualitative approach. The use of jidur, terbang, and kendhang musical instruments in Dolalak dance in Purworejo goes beyond mere musical elements and physical movements. In this understanding, through Roland Barthes' conception of signifier and signified, it opens the way to delve into deeper meanings and symbolism inherent in each musical instrument. Every beat on jidur, terbang strike, or kendhang resonance not only produces sound but also carries messages containing cultural values, history, and the cultural identity of the Purworejo community.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.037 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".