MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404578716 · doi:10.62951/bridge.v2i4.223

Penerapan Metode Waspas dalam Pengambilan Keputusan Rekrutmen Anggota KPPS Pemilu

2024· article· en· W4404578716 on OpenAlexaff
Agung Aulia Tama, Marto Sihombing, Anton Sihombing

Bibliographic record

VenueBridge · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIndonesian Election Politics and Participation
Canadian institutionsKootenay Association for Science & Technology
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceHumanitiesPhysicsArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Members of the KPPS (Voting Organizing Group) are responsible for organizing voting in a polling station (TPS) during general elections in Indonesia. They are the spearhead in carrying out the democratization process by supervising and ensuring the continuity of elections honestly, fairly, and transparently. The duties of KPPS members include preparing TPS before voting begins, receiving and examining voters, supervising the election process to ensure compliance with applicable regulations, counting votes after voting is complete, reporting election results, and maintaining security and order around TPS. Decision support system is a Decision support system or Decision Support System (DSS) is an interactive system that supports decisions in the decision-making process through alternatives obtained from data processing results. The purpose of this study is to facilitate the recruitment of members of the Voting Organizing Group (KPPS). The research method is Weighted Aggregated Sum Product Assessment (WASPAS). WASPAS is to find the most appropriate priority location choices using weighting. The results of this study are that the development of this support system can help the KPU in selecting or selecting KPPS members and this decision support system as a tool in developing KPPS members by viewing or using criteria according to the criteria needed using the WASPAS method.

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)0.000
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.069

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0210.003

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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.390
Teacher spread0.328 · 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 venueBridgeSame topicIndonesian Election Politics and ParticipationFrench-language works237,207