MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412079334 · doi:10.62383/kajian.v2i2.451

Analisis Sebaran Tingkat Kriminalitas dan Faktor-Faktor Penyebab di Kota Jayapura

2025· article· en· W4412079334 on OpenAlexaff
Kesya S. Pongtiku, Irja Tobawan Simbiak, Riano Martez Rumbiak

Bibliographic record

VenueKajian Administrasi Publik dan ilmu Komunikasi · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLegal Studies and Policies
Canadian institutionsEncana (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Crime represents unlawful acts contrary to societal norms. In 2021, Jayapura City experienced a high number of criminal cases, predominantly involving crimes against property and goods. This study maps the distribution of crime rates and identifies contributing factors in Jayapura City using the K-Means Clustering and Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) methods. K-Means Clustering analysis revealed five crime levels: high, relatively high, moderate, quite low, and low. North Jayapura District exhibited the highest crime rates among all districts, with Gurabesi Village similarly showing elevated criminal activity. The clustering results were subsequently mapped to visualize the spatial distribution patterns of crime. AHP analysis identified economic factors and low educational attainment as primary contributors to criminal behavior in Jayapura City. Among various intervention alternatives, job creation emerged as the most effective strategy, achieving the highest comparative value for simultaneously improving educational quality and security conditions. These findings provide crucial insights for law enforcement agencies and policymakers to develop targeted crime prevention strategies, focusing on economic development and educational improvement in high-risk areas, particularly North Jayapura District and Gurabesi Village.

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)0.001
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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.309 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueKajian Administrasi Publik dan ilmu KomunikasiSame topicLegal Studies and PoliciesFrench-language works237,207