PENGARUH KEPEMIMPINAN DAN MOTIVASI KERJA \nTERHADAP KINERJA PEGAWAI PADA UPTD \nPENGAWASAN KETENAGAKERJAAN WILAYAH IV \nBANDUNG
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menguji seberapa besar kepemimpinan dan motivasi \nkerja berpengaruh terhadap kinerja karyawan di Unit Pelaksana Teknis Daerah \nPengawasan Ketenagakerjaan Wilayah IV Bandung baik secara parsial mapun \nsimultan. Metode penelitian yang digunakan adalah desktriptif dan verifikatif. \nPengumpulan data dilakukan melalui penyebaran kuesioner dilaksanakan pada 50 \nresponden Unit Pelaksana Teknis Daerah Pengawasan Ketenagakerjaan Wilayah \nIV Bandung. Analisis data yang digunakan adalah uji validitas, uji realibilitas, \nanalisis regresi linier berganda, korelasi ganda dan koefisien determinasi. \nHasil penelitian menunjukan bahwa kepemimpinan, motivasi kerja dan kinerja \nkayawan di Unit Pelaksana Teknis Daerah Pengawasan Ketenagakerjaan Wilayah \nIV Bandung dapat dikatakan cukup baik. Setelah dilakukan penelitian dan melalui \nproses analisis data diperoleh hasil bahwa secara simultan kedua variabel \nindependen yaitu kepemimpinan dan motivasi kerja mempunyai pengaruh besar \n42,8% terhadap kinerja karyawan. \nKata Kunci : Kepemimpinan, Motivasi dan Kinerja Karyawan
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.020 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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 it