MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409210519 · doi:10.51172/jbmb.v6i1.429

Kesiapan Aktor dan Kebijakan dalam Mewujudkan Smart Mobility di Provinsi Bali

2025· article· en· W4409210519 on OpenAlexaff
Arif Ganda Purnama, Surya Tri Esthi Wira Hutama, Muhammad Indra Hadi Wijaya, Mentari Pratami

Bibliographic record

VenueJurnal Bali Membangun Bali · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicUrban Transport Systems Analysis
Canadian institutionsEncana (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose: As the gateway to Indonesian tourism, Bali needs to transform into a smart city to overcome the complexity of the political environment, social and economic disparities, resolve rigid administrative systems, and increase the effectiveness of city infrastructure. One of the infrastructure problems is in the transportation sector which is caused by limited public transportation facilities to keep up with the increasing use of land as a generator and the use of private vehicles. This research tries to analyze the role of the actors and policies involved and the role of policy, power, interests, the relationship between actors and policies in realizing smart mobility. Research methods: Data sources for analysis were obtained from secondary data from planning documents and were verified through limited discussions with stakeholders. Results and discussion: The results obtained by policies related to smart mobility in Bali Province have fulfilled all the components that form smart mobility in Bali Province. Actors with high capabilities and interests include the Inna Group, Electric Vehicle Committee, Transportation Agency, PLN, and GIZ. The analysis of the relationship between policies, actors, and indicators of smart mobility shows that all actors and policies in Bali Province are suitable for realizing smart mobility. Implication: By recognizing smart mobility, it is hoped that people will get a better quality of life in several aspects: a better environment, better public services, and better economic and employment opportunities.

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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.041

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.201 · 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 designQualitative
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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJurnal Bali Membangun BaliSame topicUrban Transport Systems AnalysisFrench-language works237,207