Penerapan Algoritma Apriori untuk Rekomendasi Asuransi pada Nasabah
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Jasindo Insurance Company is one of the insurance companies that receives insurance coverage both directly and indirectly, with ownership of 1 share of dwiwarna series A owned by the Republic of Indonesia and 424,999 shares of Series B owned by PT Bahana Pembinaan Usaha Indonesia (Persero). PT Asuransi Jasa Indonesia has several products and choices in choosing which insurance is needed by customers in agriculture, health, education and many more. Due to the large amount of competition in the business world, it requires management to find the right strategy in increasing the use of Jasindo insurance by knowing the relationship between age, gender, marital status, occupation and the type of Jasindo insurance that is widely chosen by customers. In order to find out the use of insurance that is widely used by the community, it is necessary to analyze the data on the use of insurance using the apriori algorithm method to determine the combination between item-sets of transaction data on Jasindo insurance data. Based on the research conducted after experimenting with the above case with a minimum support = 25%, confidence = 100% so that the results of the rule that meets the support and confidence values are obtained, namely if the gender is male, the marital status is Unmarried, then the type of insurance is jasimdo health and jasindo rainbow then giving value is successful with 25% support, 100% confidence.
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 | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.004 |
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".