MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3135028714

Employment Among LA County Residents Experiencing Homelessness

2020· article· en· W3135028714 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Till von Wachter, Geoffrey Schnorr, Nefara Riesch

Bibliographic record

VenueeScholarship (California Digital Library) · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHomelessness and Social Issues
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEarningsQuarter (Canadian coin)Political scienceDemographic economicsGeographyPsychologyGerontologyBusinessMedicineEconomicsAccounting
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The California Policy Lab found that a majority (74%) of people who enrolled to receive homeless services in Los Angeles between 2010 and 2018 had worked in California before enrolling for services. Over one third (37%) worked in the two years prior to receiving homeless services, and about one in five (19%) of individuals were working in the same calendar quarter that they enrolled to receive services. This report provides an in-depth analysis of employment dynamics for people before, during, and after homelessness. The report includes an analysis of quarterly and annual employment rates, earnings, and differences among various groups, with a focus on “recent workers” who had worked within three or four years prior to enrolling for services and who tended to have higher employment rates and earnings than the rest of the sample.This work has been supported, in part, by the University of California Multicampus Research Programs and Initiatives grant MRP-19-600774.

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 score0.084
Threshold uncertainty score0.167

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.279 · 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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueeScholarship (California Digital Library)→Same topicHomelessness and Social Issues→French-language works237,207→