MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403239326 · doi:10.29313/bcsurp.v4i3.14024

Identifikasi Potensi Bangunan Cagar Budaya dan Objek Diduga Cagar Budaya untuk Wisata Sejarah

2024· article· en· W4403239326 on OpenAlexaff
Aditya Lesmana, Astri Mutia Ekasari

Bibliographic record

VenueBandung Conference Series Urban & Regional Planning · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicArchitectural and Urban Studies
Canadian institutionsEncana (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. Historical buildings with cultural heritage status and objects suspected of being cultural heritage in Tanjungpandan Sub-district have been designated as urban historical tourism objects based on the Regional Spatial Plan (RTRW) and the Regency Tourism Development Master Plan (RIPPARKAB). However, these buildings have not been optimal in attracting tourists, especially in historical tourism. Until now, historical tourism activities have not been carried out intensively, coupled with the condition of some buildings that have been damaged, thus becoming an obstacle in the development of historical tourism in Tanjungpandan Sub-district. The purpose of this research is to identify cultural heritage buildings and alleged cultural heritage objects that have the potential to become historical tourism attractions. This research uses descriptive analysis technique method with qualitative approach. The data collection techniques used include literature study, observation, and interviews. The results of the analysis show that of the 20 buildings studied, there are 19 buildings that have the potential to be a historical tourist attraction. The buildings consist of 7 government-owned cultural heritage buildings and 12 suspected cultural heritage objects, which include 8 government-owned, 2 foundation-owned, 1 privately-owned, and 1 privately-owned objects. However, to follow up on conservation efforts in the context of historical tourism development, 12 objects suspected of being cultural heritage must go through the stage of designation as cultural heritage first as a form of protection in preservation efforts. Abstrak. Bangunan – bangunan bersejarah yang berstatus cagar budaya dan objek yang diduga cagar budaya di Kecamatan Tanjungpandan telah diperuntukkan sebagai objek wisata sejarah perkotaan berdasarkan Rencana Tata Ruang Wilayah (RTRW) dan Rencana Induk Pengembangan Pariwisata Kabupaten (RIPPARKAB). Namun, bangunan-bangunan tersebut belum optimal dalam menarik minat wisatawan, khususnya dalam wisata sejarah. Hingga saat ini, kegiatan wisata sejarah belum dilaksanakan secara intensif, ditambah dengan kondisi beberapa bangunan yang mengalami kerusakan, sehingga menjadi kendala dalam pengembangan wisata sejarah di Kecamatan Tanjungpandan. Tujuan penelitian ini adalah mengidentifikasi bangunan cagar budaya dan objek diduga cagar budaya yang berpotensi menjadi daya tarik wisata sejarah. Penelitian ini menggunakan metode teknik analisis deskriptif dengan pendekatan kualitatif. Teknik pengumpulan data yang digunakan meliputi studi pustaka, observasi, dan wawancara. Hasil analisis menunjukkan bahwa dari 20 bangunan yang diteliti, terdapat 19 bangunan yang berpotensi dijadikan daya tarik wisata sejarah. Bangunan tersebut terdiri dari 7 bangunan cagar budaya milik pemerintah dan 12 objek yang diduga cagar budaya, yang meliputi 8 objek milik pemerintah, 2 milik yayasan, 1 milik swasta, dan 1 milik pribadi. Namun, untuk menindaklanjuti upaya konservasi dalam rangka pengembangan wisata sejarah, 12 objek yang diduga cagar budaya harus melalui tahap penetapan sebagai cagar budaya terlebih dahulu sebagai bentuk perlindungan dalam upaya pelestarian.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.615
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.191 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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 venueBandung Conference Series Urban & Regional PlanningSame topicArchitectural and Urban StudiesFrench-language works237,207