MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2954819144 · doi:10.1080/17535069.2019.1623558

Build it and they will come: whatever happened to social housing in Mexico

2019· article· en· W2954819144 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueUrban Research & Practice · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicUrban and Rural Development Challenges
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent evolution of social housing policies in Mexico promoted deregulation of housing finance and a shift from top-down publicly controlled provision of social housing to a corporate model of social housing development based on subsidised homeownership for low- and middle income households. While innovation through mortgage-backed certificates mobilized private capital for the purchase of social housing, the housing policy did not provide the regulatory framework necessary to minimize market failure. In the aftermath of the global financial crisis of 2009, Mexico faced overproduction of social housing, bankrupt financial institutions and social housing developers and more than 5 million abandoned homes in Mexican cities. We argue that the results of the social housing experiment demonstrate a need for coordinated action to align fiscal, financial and regulatory instruments to create a more resilient system of social housing provision.

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)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.685
Threshold uncertainty score0.713

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.090
GPT teacher head0.416
Teacher spread0.325 · 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