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
Abstract Several decades of research demonstrate a link between neighborhood residence and human development throughout the life course. This chapter goes beyond enumerating studies that have found such connections between neighborhoods and development; we focus on synthesizing findings from methodologically rigorous research to lay a foundation of what we know about how and why neighborhoods matter for children during the first two decades of life. We begin the chapter with an overview of the history and context of neighborhood research, with special attention to the intersections of research and policy. We next turn our attention to defining the neighborhood context for children. By addressing issues of theory and measurement in neighborhood research, we provide a framework for the third section on approaches to studying neighborhood influences on children's development. The fourth section presents a review of the current state of research in the field, integrating multiple aspects of the neighborhood context and synergies with related contexts and individual characteristics. The fifth section then considers the neighborhood as a unit of intervention. Finally, we offer a dynamic framework for the study of neighborhoods and child development before presenting our conclusions.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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