MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402093640 · doi:10.35308/jic.v8i1.9172

ITSBAT NIKAH DALAM RANGKA MEMBERIKAN PERLINDUNGAN HUKUM TERHADAP PERNIKAHAN SIRI

2024· article· id· W4402093640 on OpenAlexaff
Siti Rahmah, M. Yakub Aiyub Kadir, Eva Susanna, Dewi Astini, Meutia Delima, Kamisah Kamisah

Bibliographic record

VenueIus Civile Refleksi Penegakan Hukum dan Keadilan · 2024
Typearticle
Languageid
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMarriage and Family Dynamics
Canadian institutionsEncana (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nikah siri dilihat dari hukum positif Indonesia tidak diakui secara sah karena pernikahan siri adalah pernikahan yang tidak terdaftar secara resmi di Kantor Urusa Agama (KUA) atau Pencatatan Sipil. Dalam hukum Islam pernikahan siri sah, nikah yang syarat dan rukun nikahnya telah terpenuhi yaitu,wali nikah, dua orang saksi yang adil, ijab dan kabul. Hukum adat jika proses adatnya telah dilaksanakan yang diketahui oleh ketua adat perkawinan sah tanpa dilakukan dihadapan pegawai pencatat nikah.Tujuan penelitian ini adalah untuk mengetahui bagaimana negara melindungi perempuan dan anak dalam pernikahan siri dan bagaimana prosedur pengajuan itsbat terhadap pernikahan siri. Penelitian yang digunakan adalah penelitian hukum normatif. Untuk mendapatkan perlindungan hukum bagi istri nikah siri dapat diterapkan dengan melakukan permohonan itsbat nikah ke Pengadilan Agama/Mahkamah Syar’iyah. Pernikahan siri karena berada dalam status perkawinan poligami tanpa izin istri sah, tidak dapat mengajukan itsbat nikah, kecuali mengajukan istbat nikah karena dalam rangka penyelesaian perceraian. Selain itu, pengajuan itsbat nikah juga tidak dapat dilakukan apabila salah satu pihak bukan beragama Islam.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.048
Threshold uncertainty score0.160

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0480.015

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.281 · 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
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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIus Civile Refleksi Penegakan Hukum dan KeadilanSame topicMarriage and Family DynamicsFrench-language works237,207