MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411530004 · doi:10.31969/pusaka.v12i2.1558

Ciri Khas Nisan pada Makam Belanda di Kota Ternate

2024· article· id· W4411530004 on OpenAlexaff
Komang Ayu Suwindiatrini, Helmi Yanar Dwi Prasetyo

Bibliographic record

VenuePUSAKA · 2024
Typearticle
Languageid
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPacific and Southeast Asian Studies
Canadian institutionsWiLAN (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Jejak peninggalan Belanda tidak hanya terlihat dari bangunan-bangunan besar, tapi juga dari struktur kecil seperti makam. Secara umum pembahasan tentang makam Belanda di Indonesia lebih banyak fokus pada Jawa dan Sumatera, akan tetapi masih sangat kurang pembahasan tentang makam Belanda di timur Indonesia termasuk Kota Ternate. Menurut catatan sejarah, Ternate dan sekitarnya adalah daerah tujuan masyarakat dunia karena kehadiran rempah. Padahal ada jejak yang masih tersisa hingga saat ini dan ada data arkeologis yang dapat digali dari makam tersebut. Penelitian ini menggunakan metode kualitatif dengan pendekatan studi kasus serta berpijak pada data utama dari Laporan Pendataan Makam Belanda di Kota Ternate milik Balai Pelestarian Cagar Budaya Maluku Utara yang selanjutnya dianalisis untuk mendapatkan korpus data secara lebih spesifik. Dari korpus data yang ada, diharapkan dapat diketahui siapa saja persona yang dimakamkan serta makna dibalik lambang heraldik yang dibuat pada nisan. Makam yang ada di Ternate secara garis besar dibagi dalam dua periode yaitu VOC dan Hindia Belanda. Hasil yang didapat salah satunya yaitu tentang kondisi politik mempengaruhi bentuk makam yang ada. Jika di awal masa VOC, makam Belanda di Ternate dibuat bagus dengan banyak lambang, maka pada masa berikutnya, makam-makam yang ditemukan bentuknya lebih sederhana karena dari segi bahan, ukuran dan ragam hias tidak serumit makam dari periode VOC.

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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.099

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0300.005

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.277 · 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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePUSAKASame topicPacific and Southeast Asian StudiesFrench-language works237,207