Kajian Kualitas Ruang Publik di Kawasan Sport Center Tadjimalela Sumedang
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. Public spaces play a crucial role in urban life. One example is the Sports Center, which is a public space providing facilities that serve the community. These facilities are often poorly managed by both the government and the private sector, for example, inadequate facilities that are unsuitable for use by users. If not addressed promptly, this will lead to more complex problems and hinder development, especially in Sumedang Regency. The method used is quantitative. While the analysis carried out includes Descriptive Analysis and GPSI (Good Public Space Index) Analysis. GPSI is used to assess the quality of public spaces based on various dimensions of space use by the community, such as intensity of use, diversity of activities, duration of visits, as well as time variations and user characteristics. The data collection process was through observation and questionnaires. Based on the results of the analysis using GPSI, the quality of the area is classified as moderate with stable intensity of use and diversity of activities still dominated by sports. However, aspects of comfort and security still need to be improved due to limited facilities. This area has great potential to be developed into a more inclusive and comfortable public space. Abstrak. Ruang publik memiliki peranan yang sangat penting dalam kehidupan perkotaan. Salah satunya yaitu Sport Center, bahwa pusat olahraga ini merupakan salah satu area ruang publik dan menyediakan fasilitas yang melayani masyarakat yang sering kali kurangnya dikelola dengan baik oleh pemerintah maupun pihak swasta, contohnya mulai dari fasilitas yang tidak menunjang dan tidak layak untuk dipakai oleh para pengguna. Hal tersebut apabila tidak segera ditangani maka akan menyebabkan masalah yang lebih kompleks dan menghambat perkembangan khususnya di Kabupaten Sumedang. Metode yang digunakan yaitu kuantitatif. Sedangkan analisis yang dilakukan yaitu terdapat Analisis Deskriptif dan Analisis GPSI (Good Public Space Index). GPSI digunakan untuk menilai kualitas ruang publik berdasarkan berbagai dimensi penggunaan ruang oleh masyarakat, seperti intensitas penggunaan, keberagaman aktivitas, durasi kunjungan, serta variasi waktu dan karakteristik pengguna. Proses pengumpulan data melalui observasi dan kuesioner. Berdasarkan hasil analisis menggunakan GPSI, kualitas kawasan tergolong sedang dengan intensitas penggunaan yang stabil dan keberagaman aktivitas yang masih didominasi oleh olahraga. Namun, aspek kenyamanan dan keamanan masih perlu ditingkatkan karena keterbatasan fasilitas. Kawasan ini memiliki potensi besar untuk dikembangkan menjadi ruang publik yang lebih inklusif dan nyaman. Kata Kunci: Ruang Publik, Sport Center, Kualitas
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.025 | 0.003 |
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".