MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7132848771 · doi:10.33019/37tah858

<b>Pengaruh Tingkat Pendidikan Terhadap Kemiskinan di Kabupaten Bangka Tengah</b>

2025· article· W7132848771 on OpenAlexaff
Ahmad Rowatul Irham, Monica Wulan Patricia, Azira Diva Bastari, Harum Min Sucitra

Bibliographic record

VenueZoning · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic Growth and Fiscal Policies
Canadian institutionsEncana (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPopulationBureaucracyStatistical analysisResearch method

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Provinsi Kepulauan Bangka Belitung, angka kemiskinan relatif rendah yaitu sebesar 69,95 ribu jiwa atau 4,55% pada Maret 2024, namun masih terdapat disparitas antarwilayah. Sedangkan Kabupaten Bangka Tengah, tercatat sebagai daerah dengan jumlah penduduk miskin terbanyak kedua yaitu sebesar 12,04 ribu jiwa setelah Kabupaten Bangka. Persentase penduduk miskin di Bangka Tengah pada tahun 2023 naik yang menjadi tantangan yang serius dalam mengatasi permasalahan kemiskinan di Bangka Tengah. Namun, capaian pembangunan bidang Pendidikan di Kabupaten Bangka Tengah sendiri masih belum optimal. Sebagian besar masyarakat belum menyelesaikan Pendidikan Menengah, sehingga kualitas tenaga kerjanya masih tergolong rendah. Kondisi ini dapat berdampak terhadap rendahnya kualitas sumber daya manusia, keterbatasan kemampuan dalam pekerjaan yang layak, dan rendahnya produktivitas tenaga kerja, serta peningkatan pendapatan masyarakat yang memperbesar kesenjangan kesejahteraan antar wilayah. Untuk menganalisis pengaruh lama sekolah terhadap tingkat kemiskinan, maka dilakukan uji regresi linear sederhana dengan menggunakan model summary dan anova yang menunjukkan bahwa rata-rata lama sekolah tidak memiliki pengaruh yang berarti terhadap tingkat kemiskinan di Kabupaten Bangka Tengah.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.627
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.196 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
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 venueZoningSame topicEconomic Growth and Fiscal PoliciesFrench-language works237,207