MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409441404 · doi:10.55606/cendekia.v5i1.3362

Hak-hak Kewarganegaraan dalam Kerangka Negara Hukum : Kajian Teoretis dan Praktis di Indonesia

2024· article· en· W4409441404 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ashfiya Nur Atqiya, Ahmad Muhamad Mustain Nasoha, Nabhan Tabarok, Muti'ah Nuha Mumtazah, Hannamuddin Wafiyur Rahman

Bibliographic record

VenueCENDEKIA Jurnal Ilmu Sosial Bahasa dan Pendidikan · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLegal Studies and Policies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study discusses citizenship rights within the framework of the rule of law in Indonesia, focusing on both theoretical and practical aspects. Citizenship is a crucial element in the legal system, as it grants individuals legal status, through which they can access civil, political, and social rights. However, despite the constitutional guarantee of citizenship rights, their implementation in Indonesia still faces various challenges, particularly regarding stateless individuals, children from mixed marriages, and limited access to citizenship documents. This research employs a normative juridical and comparative method by analyzing Indonesia's citizenship regulations and comparing them with countries such as Canada and Germany. The findings indicate that Indonesia needs to reform its citizenship policies to be more inclusive and aligned with international standards. Recommendations include addressing statelessness issues, simplifying the administrative process for obtaining citizenship, and aligning policies with international principles. Therefore, it is expected that Indonesia's citizenship policies can provide more equitable and fair protection for all its citizens.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.276 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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 venueCENDEKIA Jurnal Ilmu Sosial Bahasa dan PendidikanSame topicLegal Studies and PoliciesFrench-language works237,207