MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389343690 · doi:10.1177/17461979231206948

Investigating young people’s involvement in participatory budgeting

2023· article· en· W4389343690 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

VenueEducation Citizenship and Social Justice · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicChildren's Rights and Participation
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLitmusCitizen journalismParticipatory budgetingIdentity (music)Public relationsQualitative researchSociologyProcess (computing)Test (biology)Political scienceEcologySocial sciencePolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It is widely believed that assisting young people to participate in community affairs is a potent way to contribute to both youth and community development. One way in which youth can become involved in their communities is through participatory budgeting (PB) processes. This study investigates young people’s understanding of, and experience with, the PB process organized by Toronto Community Housing in Canada. The findings of our qualitative study suggest that some youth understand the primary purpose of PB to be the betterment of the community as a whole; that motivation to become involved can be enhanced through appropriate identity-formation and adult support; and that youth can serve as a litmus test for the fairness of the deliberative practices associated with PB.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.496
Threshold uncertainty score0.948

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.085
GPT teacher head0.369
Teacher spread0.283 · 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