The World Health Organization Age-Friendly Cities Project in Portland, Oregon, USA
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
The older population is increasing in size in Portland, the state of Oregon, the United States, and the rest of the world. Our cities and regions are vital to the support of this demographic shift through the provision of quality built environments, services, and social, cultural, and civic engagement opportunities promote healthy and active aging. Over the next 30 years, the Portland-Vancouver metropolitan area will see dramatic growth in the proportion of the population that is aged 65 and older. Although the total population will increase by 47 percent, the 65+ population will more than double, growing by over 137 percent, to comprise 17 percent of the population in 2030, compared to 10.5 percent in 2000. Fueling this increase will be the aging of the baby boomers. As a city and a region, changes that will enhance the quality of life, independence, and well-being of our aging population can be made. These include addressing important needs that are identified, and taking advantage of assets and resources that an older and experienced population provides.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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