MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7132854267 · doi:10.33019/d5je0r76

<b>Analisis Kemampuan Lahan di Kabupaten Bangka</b>

2025· article· W7132854267 on OpenAlexaff
Arif Ilfani, Achmad Arifo, Muhammad Rizki Al Fajar, Nafa Lorenza, Sabina Yidra Saputri, Yesenia Darpa Ariani, Fahri Setiawan

Bibliographic record

VenueZoning · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldEngineering
TopicWetland Management and Conservation
Canadian institutionsEncana (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLand useGeographic information systemLand information systemLand-use planningLand managementGovernment (linguistics)Spatial analysisNatural resource

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study aims to analyze land capability in Bangka Regency based on nine Land Capability Units (LCU) using a weighted scoring and overlay method. The analysis incorporates spatial data processed through Geographic Information System (GIS) applications such as QGIS. The classification divides the land into five zones: very low, low, moderate, high, and very high capability. The results show that Zone V (very high capability) dominates most of the region, especially in districts like Mendo Barat and Belinyu, indicating strong potential for land development. Conversely, Zone I (very low capability) covers only a minimal area, highlighting its unsuitability for intensive use. Factors influencing land capability include morphology, slope stability, drainage, erosion risk, water availability, and natural disaster vulnerability. These findings provide a spatial basis for sustainable land use planning and are expected to support local government policies in optimizing land utilization while minimizing environmental risks.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.037
Threshold uncertainty score0.074

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.199 · 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 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 topicWetland Management and ConservationFrench-language works237,207