BECOMING AND REMAINING HOMELESS: A QUALITATIVE INVESTIGATION
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
This article reports the qualitative findings of a multimethod study of the homeless population in Toronto, Canada. The qualitative component sought to identify how people become homeless and why some individuals remain homeless for an extended period of time or cycle in and out of homelessness (the chronically homeless). In-depth, semistructured interviews were conducted with 29 homeless adults. The findings suggest that people both become and remain homeless due to a combination of macro level factors (poverty, lack of employment, low welfare wages, lack of affordable housing) and personal vulnerability (childhood abuse or neglect, mental health symptoms, impoverished support networks, substance abuse). Chronically homeless individuals often reported experiences of severe childhood trauma and tended to attribute their continued homelessness to a substance abuse problem. It is concluded that both macro and individual level factors must be considered in planning programs and services to address the issue of homelessness in Canada.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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