MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2113656720 · doi:10.22230/cjnser.2014v5n1a169

Building a Co-operative Community in Public Housing: The Case of the Atkinson Housing Co-operative

2014· article· en· W2113656720 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Hoda Farahmandpour

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian journal of nonprofit and social economy research · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHousing, Finance, and Neoliberalism
Canadian institutionsInstitute for Christian StudiesUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPublic housingPolitical scienceSociologyEconomicsEconomic growth

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In 1973, amendments were made to the National Housing Act that encouraged collaboration between the Canadian government and nonprofit organizations in the housing sector.More recently, in the face of dwindling government support for public and social housing and an increasing demand for affordable accommodations, the role of the social economy in this sector has come to the fore.Increasingly, co-operative organizations have been recognized as an integral part of the social economy, while groups of residents in public or private housing have, in some cases, made arrangements to assume co-ownership of the properties in which they reside.An illustrative example of this emerging phenomenon is the conversion of the Alexandra Park public housing project in downtown Toronto into the Atkinson Housing Co-operative.Jorge Sousa has diligently captured this transition in Building a Co-operative Community in Public Housing: The Case of the Atkinson Housing Co-operative.The aim of this book, as Sousa explains clearly, is practical: to describe the establishment of the Atkinson Housing Cooperative through an ethnographic lens in order to draw out insights gained in the conversion process.In doing so, Sousa hopes to explain how this case-the first of its kind in Canada-unfolded.He also aims to establish a framework that may be employed to assist other communities in similar circumstances; it is referred to as the Framework for Community-Based Control.Vol. 5, No. 1 Spring / Printemps 2014 pp.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.154
Threshold uncertainty score0.307

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0620.020
Scholarly communication0.0120.008
Open science0.0030.013
Research integrity0.0090.012
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0180.001

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 head0.130
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.214 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations2
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian journal of nonprofit and social economy researchSame topicHousing, Finance, and NeoliberalismFrench-language works237,207