MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2012014096 · doi:10.1080/14927713.2006.9651363

Practicing community development and third way politics: Still faking it?

2006· article· en· W2012014096 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Alison Pedlar

Bibliographic record

VenueLeisure/Loisir · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicCommunity Development and Social Impact
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoliticsSociologyPolitical sciencePsychologyEngineering ethicsEngineeringLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper addresses concerns that stem from the shift toward third way politics by governments in the name of fostering community development and social capital. In this context, voluntarism is something of a double‐edged sword for recreation and leisure studies. The volunteer plays a critical role in community recreation, but may also serve to sanction government abdication of responsibility for equitable and sustainable developments in aspects of community life, including recreation. It is suggested that both citizen and government action is necessary to encourage equality and flourishing of the community as a whole in recreation and leisure.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.054

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0090.042
Scholarly communication0.0160.011
Open science0.0010.009
Research integrity0.0040.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.001

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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.202 · 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

Citations10
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLeisure/LoisirSame topicCommunity Development and Social ImpactFrench-language works237,207