MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2513121968

Are the economically poor information poor? Does the digital divide affect the homeless and access to information?

2002· other· en· W2513121968 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueNC Digital Online Collection of Knowledge and Scholarship (The University of North Carolina at Greensboro) · 2002
Typeother
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLibrary Science and Administration
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersDalhousie University
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical sciencePhilosophy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Homeless persons lack economic capital, but it is less clear whether they concomitantly lack important information capital. The basic information needed by the homeless is not available on the Internet as this is information controlled by governmental social services agencies, but does this result in a state of information poverty? This paper examines the issues of how the lack of access to information technology does not affect how the homeless access basic-needs-level information. The study investigates the information needs of the homeless, information sources, and information-seeking behaviours within the analytical constructs of information outsiders and insiders and the theory of information poverty posed by Chatman (1996). The study explores the differences in information seeking pursuits based on whether the catalyst for the search is internally or externally motivated. Finally, the paper speculates on whether making basic level needs information available via the Internet would be useful and/or used.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.226 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations20
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNC Digital Online Collection of Knowledge and Scholarship (The University of North Carolina at Greensboro)Same topicLibrary Science and AdministrationFrench-language works237,207