REFORMASI REGULASI DALAM RANGKA PENYELENGGARAAN PEMERINTAHAN DAERAH
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The handover of some government affairs from the central government to regional governments through regional autonomy carries the implication that regions have the authority to regulate and manage their own affairs. Even so, the handover is not without limitations but must be carried out based on the principles of the Unitary State of the Republic of Indonesia. Another logical consequence is that regional governments are given the right to establish regional regulations and other regulations to carry out autonomy and assistance tasks. Regional regulations as manifestations of the implementation of regional autonomy are expected to be formed to answer legal problems that exist in the regions. However, this authority is not balanced with the quality and quantity of adequate legal norms, resulting in overlapping, inconsistent, multiple interpretations and disharmony between laws and regulations. This certainly has an impact on the success of achieving development in the regions as a representation of national development progress. Therefore, through this research, various efforts that can be made to carry out legal reform in the context of regional government administration will be studied. The research method used in this research is normative juridical, while the data collection technique used is through document and library studies of secondary data in the form of primary, secondary and tertiary legal materials. The research results show that structuring regulations in the regions through regulatory reform in the context of regional government administration is carried out by structuring regulations to realize proportional quantities; structuring regulations to improve quality; institutional arrangement for regulation and re-regulation of Law Number 23 of 2014 concerning Regional Government.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".