MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2086855757 · doi:10.1177/1476750305047983

An understanding of poverty from those who are poor

2005· article· en· W2086855757 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueAction Research · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicCommunity Health and Development
Canadian institutionsYork University
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPovertyLivelihoodParticipatory action researchScrutinyCitizen journalismSociologyBureaucracyCulture of povertyPolitical scienceEconomic growthAction (physics)Basic needsEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Participatory research in the study of poverty invites those living in difficult circumstances to participate in an analysis of their own livelihood situation. A participatory poverty assessment was facilitated with a small group of women who are members of a food co-operative in Niagara Falls, Canada and who live in poverty. The women explored together issues of well-being, the stress of living in poverty, the role of the social assistance system in shaping their lives and community attitudes. Important themes which emerged included an emphasis on social relationships, the impact of the pervasive scrutiny of the social assistance bureaucracy, the importance of community good will and the possibilities for community action. This article discusses the contribution of local knowledge to an understanding of poverty as well as the limitations of participation in changing social policy.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.150
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.636
GPT teacher head0.618
Teacher spread0.017 · 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