Applying Zero Waste Management Concept in a City of Indonesia: A Literature Review
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
City waste management in Indonesia still faces loads of challenges, mainly in the case the ultimate disposal (landfill) availability. Only 60-70% of the waste can be transported and disposed of to landfill, while the rest are scattered in various places. Waste dumped in landfill emits leachate contaminating and greenhouse gases. Also, the discarded material is a waste of non-renewable natural resource. Holistic management is necessary, starting upstream to downstream waste management. The concept of Zero Waste offers waste management, initial from the avoiding of trash, recycling, reduction and recovery of second-hand material. Some cities in the world such as Canberra, Adelaide (Australia), Stockholm (Sweden), Nova-Scotia (Canada) and San Francisco (USA) has set a target of Zero Waste. Indonesia still implements management that emphasizes the waste management disposal in a landfill. This literature review examines to find out whether Indonesia can apply the concept of Zero Waste in the upcoming.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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