MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7018715066

EFESIENSI TEKNIS USAHATANI KOPI ROBUSTA DI KABUPATEN LIMA PULUH KOTA PROVINSI SUMATERA BARAT

2023· dissertation· id· W7018715066 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueAndalas University eThesis (Andalas University) · 2023
Typedissertation
Languageid
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgricultural Research and Practices
Canadian institutionsEncana (Canada)
Fundersnot available
Keywordsnot available
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Kabupaten Lima Puluh Kota merupakan salah satu daerah yang mempunyai potensi dalam pengembangan tanaman kopi Robusta. Faktor produksi yang tersedia belum dapat menjamin tingginya produktivitas. Tujuan penelitian ini adalah menganalisis faktor-faktor yang mempengaruhi produktivitas kopi Robusta, menganalisis tingkat efisiensi teknis usahatani kopi Robusta dan menganalisis faktor-faktor yang mempengaruhi efisiensi teknis usahatani kopi Robusta di Kabupaten Lima Puluh Kota. Metode yang digunakan dalam penelitian ini adalah metode survei pada 60 orang sampel melalui pengambilan sampel secara acak sederhana. Analisis data menggunakan fungsi produksi stochastic frontier Cobb-Douglas. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan Faktor-faktor yang berpengaruh secara signifikan terhadap produktivitas kopi Robusta di Kabupaten Lima Puluh Kota adalah umur tanaman dan jumlah pohon. Faktor umur tanaman dan jumlah pohon berdampak positif terhadap produktivitas kopi. Tingkat efisiensi teknis usahatani kopi di Kabupaten Lima Puluh Kota mulai dari 0,54 sampai 0,99 dengan rata-rata tingkat efisiensi teknis adalah 0,83. Artinya petani sudah efisien secara teknis namun masih bisa meningkatkan produktivitas kopi.

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)0.002
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 score0.053
Threshold uncertainty score0.105

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.030
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.191 · 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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAndalas University eThesis (Andalas University)Same topicAgricultural Research and PracticesFrench-language works237,207