MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402063715 · doi:10.58411/f3gvv919

PENGUKURAN INDEKS KEPUASAN LAYANAN INFRASTRUKTUR KOTA MALANG TAHUN 2021

2022· article· id· W4402063715 on OpenAlexaff
Bidang Penelitian dan Pengembangan

Bibliographic record

VenuePANGRIPTA · 2022
Typearticle
Languageid
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic Growth and Fiscal Policies
Canadian institutionsEncana (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Indeks Kepuasan Layanan Infrastruktur (IKLI) merupakan ukuran yang digunakan untuk mengetahui tingkat kepuasan masyarakat atas pembangunan infrastruktur oleh Pemerintah. IKLI dapat menjadi suatu alat untuk mengetahui gambaran perspektif masyarakat secara obyektif terkait layanan infrastruktur yang diselenggarakan oleh pemerintah. Indikator yang digunakan dalam pengukuran IKLI Kota Malang tahun 2021 meliputi ketersediaan fisik, kualitas fisik, kesesuaian, pemanfaatan, dan kontribusi terhadap perekonomian. Tujuan Penyusunan IKLI Kota Malang tahun 2021 yaitu untuk mengukur capaian indeks kepuasan layanan infrastruktur tahun 2021, menganalisis antara hasil capaian yang diperoleh pada tahun 2021 dengan target/sasaran yang telah ditetapkan, mengkomparasikan capaian indeks kepuasan layanan infrastruktur tahun 2021 dengan hasil forecasting capaian indeks kepuasan layanan infrastruktur tahun 2018-2023, mengidentifikasi dan menganalisis permasalahan-permasalahan pada hasil review capaian dan target/sasaran indeks kepuasan layanan infrastruktur, serta memberikan rekomendasi kebijakan dan langkah-langkah apa yang perlu dilakukan Pemerintah Kota Malang berdasarkan hasil penelitian. Metode analisis yang digunakan dalam penelitian ini yaitu Importance Performance Analysi, Gap Analysis, dan analisis PGCV. Hasil pengukuran IKLI Kota Malang pada tahun 2021 diperoleh nilai 4,23 yang mengalami peningkatan dari hasil pengukuran IKLI tahun sebelumnya.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.101

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0300.005

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.191
Teacher spread0.171 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePANGRIPTASame topicEconomic Growth and Fiscal PoliciesFrench-language works237,207