MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2927215036 · doi:10.1080/02723638.2019.1598733

Policy-failing: a repealed right to shelter

2019· article· en· W2927215036 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Katie J. Wells

Bibliographic record

VenueUrban Geography · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHomelessness and Social Issues
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersConsortium canadien en neurodégénérescence associée au vieillissement
KeywordsReferendumPublic administrationPoliticsLegislatureIdeologyPolitical scienceWork (physics)Corporate governanceLawPolitical economySociologyBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In 1984 voters in Washington, D.C.approved an initiative to guarantee overnight shelter. The city was one of the first jurisdictions in the world to legislate aright to shelter and, to this day, the only one to do so by popular initiative. But the law, which emerged during one of the city’s most politically progressive periods, was overturned by the local legislature, and a voter referendum failed to reinstate it. Based on archival research and 25 in-depth interviews, this paper examines how a homeless shelter policy was made to fail. This paper analyzes the work of activists, service providers, city officials, and legal actors who created, contested, and eventually repealed the law. This analysis contributes to understandings of urban governance with theoretical explorations of the notion of policy-failing and empirical attention to the institutional mechanisms, political ideologies, and regulatory practices through which policies can be un-made.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.064
Threshold uncertainty score0.127

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0200.024
Scholarly communication0.0060.003
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0040.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.359
Teacher spread0.342 · 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

Citations8
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUrban GeographySame topicHomelessness and Social IssuesFrench-language works237,207