Bibliographic record
Abstract
Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk mendeskripsikan pengendalian internal yang ada di unit eselon 1 pusat Kementerian Agama dan evaluasiatas pelaksanaannya. Jenis penelitian ini adalah penelitian kualitatif yang meneliti kondisidan realitas pelaksanaan SPI di Kementerian Agama Pusat. Sumber data penelitian berasal dari sumber sekunder yang berasal dari data-data dokumen bukti penerapan SPI. Sedangkan sumber primer hasilwawancara dengan pihak terkait. Dari hasil penelitian ddapat bahwa penerapan sistem pengendalian internal tujan utamanya adalah agar pengelolaan keuangan negara menjadi efektif, efisien, transparan dan akuntabel. Sehingga agar pengelolaan keuangan sesuai dengan tujuan sistem pengendalian internal maka perlunya organisasi membangun penilaian risiko. Harapan dari penilaian risiko adalah agar organisasi mempunyai peta dari risiko-risiko yang ditimbulkan dan dampaknya pada pencapaian tujuan dari organisasi. Hasil dari penelitian lainnya yang didapatkan bahwa setiap level dari sistem pengendalian yang dimulai dari lingkungan pengendalian, penilaian risiko, kegiatan pengendalian, informasi dan komunikasi dan pemantauan dan pengendalian. Regulasi dari setiap tahapan pengendalian internal telah dibuat, sosialisasinya telah di berikan serta pelaksanaannya telah dijalankan.
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.030 | 0.010 |
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".