Penerapan Metode Waspas dalam Pengambilan Keputusan Rekrutmen Anggota KPPS Pemilu
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it