MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402222188 · doi:10.36985/zdj7k877

Kualitas Pelayanan Publik Dalam Peningkatan Kinerja Di Kantor Lurah Bah Kapul Kecamatan Siantar Sitalasari Kota Pematangsiantar

2019· article· id· W4402222188 on OpenAlexaff
Handrico Eldorado Dobona Purba, Robert Tua Siregar, Sarintan E Damanik, Mustafa Ginting

Bibliographic record

VenueJurnal Regional Planning · 2019
Typearticle
Languageid
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicEmployee Performance and Motivation
Canadian institutionsEncana (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Tujuan penelitian ini adalah untuk menganalisis kualitas pelayanan publik dalam pembangunan wilayah di Kantor Lurah Bah Kapul Kecamatan Siantar Sitalasari Kota Pematangsiantar. Adapun metode penelitian yang digunakan dalam penelitian ini adalah metode kuantitatif. Sedangkan teknik yang digunakan dalam pengumpulan data adalah: (1) observasi, (2) wawancara, (3) quesioner/angket dan (4) dokumentasi. Selanjutnya teknik analisis data yang dilakukan adalah analisis kuantitatif. Hasil penelitian bahwa kinerja Kantor Lurah bah Kapul Kecamatan Siantar Sitalasari Kota Pematangsiantar dari aspek Responsivitas termasuk dalam tingkat Tinggi, aspek Responsibilitas termasuk dalam tingkat Sedang, aspek Akuntabilitas termasuk dalam tingkat Tinggi, aspek Keadaptasian termasuk dalam tingkat Tinggi, aspek Kelangsungan Hidup termasuk dalam tingkat Sedang, aspek Keterbukaan/transparansi termasuk dalam tingkat Sedang, aspek Empati termasuk dalam tingkat Sedang, aspek Efektivitas termasuk dalam tingkat Sedang, aspek Produktivitas termasuk dalam tingkat Tinggi, dari aspek Efisiensi termasuk dalam tingkat Tinggi, aspek Kepuasan termasuk dalam tingkat Tinggi, aspek Keadilan termasuk dalam tingkat Tinggi, aspek Keadilan termasuk dalam tingkat Tinggi. Kinerja Kantor Lurah Bah Kapul secara keseluruhan termasuk dalam kriteria tinggi. Kesimpulan Perlu dipertahankan pelayanan kinerja organisasi dari aspek proses yang meliputi indikator responsivitas, responsibilitas, akuntabiltas, keadaptasian, kelangsungan hidup, keterbukaan/transparansi, empati. Saran dari hasil penelitian perlu adanya peningkatan kinerja organisasi dari aspek hasil yang meliputi indikator efektivitas, produktivitas, efisiensi, kepuasan, keadilan agar pelayanan publik tetap bisa dilaksanakan semaksimal mungkin

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)0.003
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.054
Threshold uncertainty score0.127

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0380.006

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.225 · 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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJurnal Regional PlanningSame topicEmployee Performance and MotivationFrench-language works237,207