MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2950856589 · doi:10.22329/csw.v6i1.5641

Conceptualizing Homeless Exits and Returns: The Case for a Multidimensional Response to Episodic Homelessness

2005· article· en· W2950856589 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Uzo Anucha

Bibliographic record

VenueCritical Social Work · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHomelessness and Social Issues
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHousing FirstPsychologySociologyDemographic economicsEconomicsPsychiatryMental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Research indicates that homelessness is dynamic and that a significant number of homeless people have experienced multiple episodes of homelessness. This episodic nature of homelessness implies that the issue for such people is not only getting housing and exiting homelessness but staying housed or when there is a need to move, making a transition to another housing without returning to homelessness. This article describes a multidimensional conceptual model that was developed by synthesizing the theoretical and research literature on homelessness. Essentially, this model identifies four dimensions in society within which multi-layered factors that impact on housing outcomes are located. The multidimensional model underscores the fact that exits and returns to homelessness are determined by a complex interaction of individual and structural factors necessitating a multilevel and integrated response to episodic homelessness.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.041

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.030
Scholarly communication0.0070.011
Open science0.0020.012
Research integrity0.0030.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.076
GPT teacher head0.441
Teacher spread0.365 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations3
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCritical Social WorkSame topicHomelessness and Social IssuesFrench-language works237,207