MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415604769 · doi:10.36456/zjnhhm43

Analisis Spatial Econometric Perilaku Pergerakan Masyarakat di Kota Makassar

2025· article· W4415604769 on OpenAlexaff
Irwan Irwan, Isfa Sastrawati, Suci Anugrah Yanti, Sri Wahyuni, Khairul Rafliansyah. S

Bibliographic record

VenueJurnal Plano Buana · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldEngineering
TopicUrban Transport Systems Analysis
Canadian institutionsEncana (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThree gorges

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Makassar merupakan kota terbesar keempat di Indonesia. Saat ini Kota Makassar sedang menghadapi permasalahan berat di dalamnya adalah sistem transportasi. Salah satunya adalah kemacetan yang disebabkan oleh ketimpangan jaringan jalan dan jumlah pengguna kendaraan pribadi yang tidak terkendali. Setiap hari lebih dari 150.000 komuter masuk ke Makassar dan terustumbuh sekitar 5% per tahun (sumber: Bappeda Makassar), yang mana mereka berasal dari kabupaten sekitar kota Makassar.Sebagai kota terbesar di Indonesia bagian timur dan salah satu kota terbesar, Makassar mempunyai pertumbuhan pergerakan transportasi tertinggi di luar Jakarta dan Surabaya. Kondisi inilah yang menjadi alasan utama dilakukannya penelitian ini untuk menjadi masukan bagi kajian dan penelitian mengenai perkembangan transportasi umum di Makassar. Model Regresi Tertimbang Geografis, yaitu jenis model statistik spasial yang menggunakan kumpulan data spasial sebagai data dasar untuk dianalisis. Model ini juga didasarkan pada model Regresi; Namun, model ini memiliki keunggulan pada hasil lokal di setiap fitur kumpulan data. Dalam penelitian ini kami menggunakan data GIS kecamatan. Hasil GWR menggambarkan hasil di setiap kecamatan dan membantu kita memahami model prediksi dan pola. skripsi ini akan mendapatkan referensi akademis kepada pemerintah kota Makassar dan pemerintah Provinsi Sulawesi Selatan mengenai perilaku perjalanan di Makassar.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
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 score0.106
Threshold uncertainty score0.211

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0180.003

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.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.205
Teacher spread0.197 · 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 venueJurnal Plano BuanaSame topicUrban Transport Systems AnalysisFrench-language works237,207