MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2967699654 · doi:10.1177/0956247819861899

Urban food insecurity and its determinants: a baseline study of Bengaluru

2019· article· en· W2967699654 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Shriya Anand, Keerthana Jagadeesh, Charrlotte Adelina, Jyothi Koduganti

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironment and Urbanization · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicFood Security and Health in Diverse Populations
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaInternational Development Research Centre
KeywordsFood securityUrban agricultureVulnerability (computing)Work (physics)Baseline (sea)Food insecuritySocioeconomicsSocioeconomic statusGeographyEconomic growthConsumption (sociology)AgricultureBusinessEconomicsPolitical scienceSociologyPopulationEngineeringSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There is an increasing need to study urban food security in the global South. This is because of the monetization of food in urban areas and compounding vulnerability from other deprivations such as lack of access to infrastructure. We assess these claims in this paper, based on a city-wide household survey in Bengaluru (Bangalore) carried out in 2016 that used experiential measures of food security like the Household Food Insecurity Access Scale. We find that income and consumption do not have a clear relationship with food insecurity. However, socioeconomic dimensions like education level and wage type of the household head, and infrastructural dimensions like housing typology, and water connection are strongly related to food security. Through this work, we attempt to establish the baseline evidence on the current status of food security in Bengaluru, to lay the foundation for a future research agenda on urban food security in India.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.122
Threshold uncertainty score0.243

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.068
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.281 · 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

Citations35
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironment and UrbanizationSame topicFood Security and Health in Diverse PopulationsFrench-language works237,207