MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402017082 · doi:10.31849/siklus.v9i1.12489

Evaluasi Kinerja Pelayanan dan Tarif Sistem Angkutan Umum Berbasis Bus di Kota Semarang (Studi Kasus : Bus Trans Semarang Koridor I Rute Terminal Penggaron – Terminal Mangkang)

2023· article· en· W4402017082 on OpenAlexaff
Mira Lestira Hariani, Vanny Varadila, Jafar Mukhlis

Bibliographic record

VenueSIKLUS Jurnal Teknik Sipil · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicUrban Transport Systems Analysis
Canadian institutionsEncana (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTerminal (telecommunication)Computer scienceComputer network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Service quality and fares are very important parameters in the operation of the public transport system. BRT Trans Semarang is a bus-based public transportation system in Semarang city that is operated to overcome congestion and accommodate the movement of people in Semarang City. This study aims to evaluate the service performance and fares of BRT Trans Semarang and to determine the level of user satisfaction. The methods used in this study are observation, interviews, questionnaires and primary surveys. The data obtained is processed, analyzed and all indicators are evaluated referring to the Technical Guidelines for Organizing Public Transport in Urban Areas in the Fixed and Regular Routes of the Director General of Land Transportation 2002. The results show that: 1) overall the performance of BRT Trans Semarang services has met the standards , and there are 2 (two) indicators that doesn't meet the standards, are the average loading factor (utilization factor) and passenger waiting time; 2) Most passengers are satisfied with BRT Trans Semarang services; 3) The exixting fare applied is below the amount of the cost operation issued by the operator so it needs Government support (subsidies) to ensure BRT Trans Semarang can continue operate.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.213 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSIKLUS Jurnal Teknik SipilSame topicUrban Transport Systems AnalysisFrench-language works237,207