MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405669323 · doi:10.20527/jukung.v10i2.20686

ANALISIS KEHILANGAN AIR DENGAN METODE NERACA AIR DAN INFRASTRUCTURE LEAKAGE INDEX (ILI) PADA PERUMDA AIR MINUM KOTA SURAKARTA

2024· article· id· W4405669323 on OpenAlexaff
Galih Iman Rakhmad, Adhi Yuniarto

Bibliographic record

VenueJukung (Jurnal Teknik Lingkungan) · 2024
Typearticle
Languageid
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWater and Land Management
Canadian institutionsEncana (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndex (typography)Leakage (economics)Computer scienceWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Air tidak berekening merupakan permasalahan utama yang dihadapi Perumda Air Minum Kota Surakarta, dengan tingkat kehilangan air mencapai 42,37% pada tahun 2023. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk mengidentifikasi dan mengendalikan kehilangan air secara fisik dengan menggunakan metode neraca air dan Indeks Kebocoran Infrastruktur (Infrastructure Leakage Index). Data primer diperoleh melalui kunjungan lapangan dan pengukuran langsung, sedangkan data sekunder diperoleh dari Perusahaan Air Minum Kota Solo. Analisis neraca air dilakukan untuk mengetahui kehilangan air secara fisik, yang kemudian digunakan untuk menghitung ILI. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan volume penyaluran air sebanyak 24.270.430 meter kubik dan kehilangan air fisik sebanyak 9.669.609 meter kubik. Nilai ILI menggambarkan efektivitas pengelolaan jaringan distribusi dalam mengendalikan kehilangan air. Kesimpulan dari studi ini menyoroti pentingnya tindakan pengendalian bebas air dan mengurangi kebocoran/kehilangan air secara fisik untuk meningkatkan efisiensi dan kualitas operasional pelayanan air minum di Kota Surakarta.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.050

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.002

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 designObservational
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 venueJukung (Jurnal Teknik Lingkungan)Same topicWater and Land ManagementFrench-language works237,207