MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3047209099 · doi:10.1080/10875549.2020.1799285

Social Assistance in Ontario: What is the Problem Represented to Be?

2020· article· en· W3047209099 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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Poverty · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Sciences and Governance
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPovertySocial policySocial assistanceSocial WelfarePublic economicsIncentiveWelfarePolicy analysisEconomicsSociologyEconomic growthPolitical sciencePublic administrationMicroeconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Social assistance policy was developed to address the issue of poverty; however, the way in which social assistance policy is developed stems from certain assumptions about the needs of people living in poverty and how those needs should be handled. In pursuing a critical analysis of social assistance policy in Ontario Canada, the What’s the Problem Represented to Be? Approach was completed. The policy of income exception was examined. Analysis showed that although income exemption provides incentives, important aspects are ignored in this policy. Sen’s Capability Approach was further applied as an evaluative framework for social welfare.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.664
Threshold uncertainty score0.870

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.270 · 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