MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412733929 · doi:10.23917/sinektika.vi.4280

Flood Risk Management (Studi Kasus: Sungai Bahodopi, Di Kecamatan Bahodopi, Kabupaten Morowali)

2025· article· id· W4412733929 on OpenAlexaff
Ikram Ikram, Gidion Tefa

Bibliographic record

VenueSinektika Jurnal Arsitektur · 2025
Typearticle
Languageid
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicGlobal Socioeconomic and Political Dynamics
Canadian institutionsEncana (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFlood risk managementGeographyFlood mythWater resource managementCartographyEnvironmental scienceArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Tujuan dari studi ini adalah untuk mendapatkan gambaran tentang pengaruh metode Soil Bioengineering dan pendekatan non-struktual terhadap peningkatan Flood Risk Management. Metode penulisan berdasarkan studi literatur dan studi preseden yang menjelaskan berbagai sumber yang berkaitan dengan penerapan Soil Bioengineering sebagai elemen Green Infrastructure dan pendekatan non-struktural untuk menanggulangi bencana banjir akbiat aktivitas industri dan permukiman penduduk di sekitar bantaran sungai. Karakteristik vegetasi akar dalam dan batang kokoh diharapkan dapat menanggulangi terjadinya bencana banjir ke dalam areal permukiman penduduk, dan pendekatan non-struktural juga dapat diterapkan, seperti pengelolaan Daerah Aliran Sungai (DAS) Sungai Bahodopi, yaitu peraturan tata guna lahan dan beberapa aturan mengenai larangan penggunaan tanah disekitar riparian sungai yang berpotensi mengurangi daerah resapan air dan menyebabkan terjadinya bencana banjir. Dengan demikian penerapan Flood Risk Management yang direncanakan dapat mengatasi bencana banjir di areal permukiman padat penduduk.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.122
Threshold uncertainty score0.243

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 studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.211 · 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 venueSinektika Jurnal ArsitekturSame topicGlobal Socioeconomic and Political DynamicsFrench-language works237,207