PENYELESAIAN TERHADAP KASUS SERTIPIKAT GANDA OLEH BADAN PERTANAHAN NASIONAL (Studi di Kantor Badan Pertanahan Nasional Kota Malang)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The main material of the research is Completion Of The Double Certificate Case By The National Land Agency with the following problem formulation: 1. How did the \nemergence of a double certificate which constitutes legal evidence of land ownership? 2. How is the resolution carried out by the authorities in resolving the issue of dual certificates? \nFrom the results of the study concluded the following conclusions: 1. The cause of the double certificate could be due to the element of intent, accidental and due \nto administrative errors. \nThe emergence of a double certificate is also caused by the lack of discipline and order of government officials related to the land sector in carrying out their duties. \n2. The National Land Agency is not a state institution in the field of judiciary, but nevertheless the National Land Agency has the authority to resolve any land issues including the issue of dual certificates. This authority is only limited to administrative authority, namely the cancellation or revocation of a certificate issued by the National Land Agency itself. The National Land Agency always strives for solutions to resolve land disputes based on the prevailing laws and regulations with due regard for a sense of justice and respect for the rights and obligations \nof each party. is deliberation. The steps for resolving disputes that they or the National Land Agency take in a dual certificate dispute are negotiation, mediation and facilitation.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.020 | 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".