Bibliographic record
Abstract
Responses to poverty, inequality and marginalisation are at the heart of critical approaches to social work and ageing. However, the boundaries being drawn around gerontological social work in education and practice tend to focus on health and on professional issues of assessment and service delivery, with limited connections to either critical gerontology or structural social work. Analysing responses to poverty and late-life homelessness from a critical perspective can explain how these gaps emerged, and situate a more clearly articulated critical gerontological social work approach in research, education and practice. Homelessness among older people is on the rise across international contexts such as the United States (US), Canada, Europe and Australia (Crane et al, 2005; Gaetz et al, 2016). Some estimates suggest that the numbers of older people who are homeless have grown by 20 per cent in the early 2000s (Crane and Joly, 2014). Although many factors contribute to this rise in late-life homelessness, many of the antecedents can be attributed to service provision, lifelong poverty and social crises such as trauma, family breakdown and mental health/substance challenges (Brown et al, 2016).
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".