MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2169149929 · doi:10.1080/02673030500062350

The Relationship between Government Assistance and Housing Outcomes among Extremely Low-income Individuals: A Qualitative Inquiry in Los Angeles

2005· article· en· W2169149929 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueHousing Studies · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHomelessness and Social Issues
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaUniversity of Winnipeg
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSubsidyWelfarePaymentSubsidized housingGovernment (linguistics)Public economicsSample (material)Welfare reformDemographic economicsEconomicsQualitative researchIndependence (probability theory)Economic stabilityBusinessEconomic growthSociologyFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper illustrates the relationship between government assistance (housing subsidies and/or welfare payments) and housing outcomes, using qualitative methods and a sample of 25 extremely low-income, homeless women at an emergency shelter in Central Los Angeles. The paper seeks to illustrate three specific patterns (identified within the larger literature) to this complex and multifaceted relationship: (1) that the presence of housing subsidies promotes the most positive outcomes overall, such as stability and independence; (2) that, in the absence of housing subsidies, the predictability and amount of welfare become critical in promoting positive housing outcomes; and (3) housing outcomes are least positive for those lacking both housing subsidies and welfare payments. Results largely conformed to these expectations, although less so for the last pattern.

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)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.128
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.251
GPT teacher head0.503
Teacher spread0.252 · 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