MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2531264313 · doi:10.7202/1034365ar

Le logement des ultra-pauvres : théorie et pratique en Haïti

2015· article· fr· W2531264313 on OpenAlex
Simon M. Fass, Lorne Huston

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Review of Community Development · 2015
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicUrban and Rural Development Challenges
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceHumanitiesPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Il est particulièrement difficile de définir des politiques et programmes de logement efficaces lorsqu’on s’adresse à deux catégories particulières de la population : les ultra-pauvres et les gens qui travaillent pour leur propre compte. Dans certaines villes du Tiers monde telles que Port-au-Prince, ces groupes constituent une partie importante de la population. Pour les ultra-pauvres, les conditions de logement sont fonction du prix des denrées de base alors que pour les travailleurs autonomes, elles sont influencées par la nécessité de consacrer des ressources à la production plutôt qu’à la consommation. L’utilisation efficace des ressources dans le but d’améliorer les conditions de logement de ces catégories de population suppose des normes de qualité et des critères d’évaluation qui ne sont pas très différents de ce que ces ménages considèrent déjà comme satisfaisant.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.878
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.093
GPT teacher head0.367
Teacher spread0.274 · 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