MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388909095 · doi:10.1080/14036096.2023.2282655

Intersecting Barriers: The Production of Housing Vulnerability for LGBTQ Refugees in Alberta, Canada

2023· article· en· W4388909095 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Kenna McDowell, Damian Collins

Bibliographic record

VenueHousing Theory and Society · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHomelessness and Social Issues
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsRefugeeVulnerability (computing)Political scienceProduction (economics)Economic growthGeographyEconomicsComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Canada’s National Housing Strategy acknowledges that identity factors are closely connected to housing vulnerability. Specifically, it identifies 12 groups at heightened risk of negative housing outcomes in Canada. In this research, we focus on the intersection of two of these groups: LGBTQ people and refugees. Existing studies establish that members of both groups are vulnerable to discrimination, homelessness, and housing unaffordability. However, they have largely been examined separately, and with limited insights into the factors that produce vulnerability. To develop a more nuanced and systemic account of LGBTQ refugees’ housing vulnerability, we conducted a study in Alberta, Canada. Utilizing Crenshaw’s theory of intersectionality, and drawing on policy documents and key-informant interviews, we identified three types of barriers to housing. We conclude that an intersectional approach provides a foundation for systemic explanations of housing vulnerability that are too often absent in policy.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.069
Threshold uncertainty score0.501

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0180.008
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0020.009
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.371
Teacher spread0.340 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations7
Published2023
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHousing Theory and SocietySame topicHomelessness and Social IssuesFrench-language works237,207