Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper examines the rewards and problematics of doing community-based research in the Downtown Eastside of Vancouver. British Columbia, It examines how the research process, experiences, and goals of a project may differ depending on one's social location in and outside of the project. Further it highlights collaboration and tensions, especially about class, privilege, and ways of knowing, between faculty, research assistants (RAs), and community-based researchers (CBRs). The Health and Home Research Project, Housing and Health among Low-income Women in Downtown Eastside Vancouver (HH the city of Vancouver rests on territory that was held by Coast Salish First Nations peoples for thousands of years (Robertson & Culhane, 2005, p. 16). Colonization and the forced dispossession of Aboriginal peoples shapes what is known as the DTES today. For many contemporary readers, the DTES came to their attention in the late 1990s when media reports about out of control, visible drug use gained national attention. Contemporary claims about drug use in the DTES are not new. The DTES has long been constructed as a site of legal and illegal drug use and historically moral reformers and sensationalized media reports have served to educate Canadians about the area. …
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.018 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".