The Impact of Gold Mining Activities on the Environment and Community in Nagari Tambang, IV Jurai District, South Pesisir District
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Nagari Tambang has an area of 14.97 𝐾𝑚2 . The population consists of 1,948 1,030 men and 918 women. Population density 130.12 per 𝐾𝑚2 . The types of mining in Nagari Tambang are coal, gold, and sirtukil. The coal mine is no longer operating, but gold and copper are still active. The local community carries out this mining activity. Problem activity mining will have an impact: the increased threat of landslides, loss of ground cover vegetation, soil erosion, increased sedimentation, decreased water quality, reduced forest area due to mining that has penetrated the forest, seawater pollution due to coal barge loading and unloading activities, as well as impacts on existing biota around the sea. Meanwhile, the effects on society include Washing waste, hazardous substances for human health, and environmental damage caused by mining. Research methods carried out are quantitative. The research location is in Nagari Tambang, IV Jurai District, Pesisir Selatan Regency. The research population is people living in Nagari Tambang, IV Jurai District, Pesisir Selatan Regency. Samples were taken purposively. Research results: 1. The Impact activity mining gold on the environment is: decreasing the quality environment, because impact of mining gold carried by the people of Nagari Tambang. Such as: a). Morphology land changed namely: layers soil, color land, structure soil, and consistency land. b). River water discharge is reduced Because water catchment in the hills Already decrease and amount plants stand forests is also decreasing. c). Public health is disturbed, such as their skin becoming dry and itchy and there are problems with their breathing. d). Haven't done it yet waste water treatment remainder from the separation process gold with material other. 2. Impact activity mining gold to society: a). Decreased interaction social with the community, b) Many young people in Nagari Tambang do not continue education to Higher Education, c). Life public No increase in a way significant, because mining use method traditional Not yet there is a business entity.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".