Analysis of Community-Based Sanitation Implementation in Pariaman City
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Proper sanitation can have health impacts and social environmental impacts if it is not implemented with optimal community-based governance in Pariaman City. This research aims to analyze the implementation of a proper Community-Based Sanitation Program in Pariaman City. This type of research is qualitative with a policy research approach. The results show that the implementation of the Community Based Sanitation Program has not reached the Universal Access target of 100-0-100, so it is categorized as not yet feasible. This is also because 100% coverage of clean water access has not been achieved, so the 0% target has not been achieved. This area is not a Underresourced neighbourhood, so it appears that the 100% adequate sanitation target has not been achieved. However, based on data in the field, there are still many infrastructure facilities that are not functioning and have not been repaired for sustainability. Beside that, there are also problems such as the development of drinking water and sanitation that is not yet sustainable, community participation is still low, and management institutions that are not yet well integrated due to the lack of capacity of Community Level Management Organizations to manage.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".