Unhoused women in Niagara: Lived expertise of homelessness in community‐engaged research
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract How do we apply a gender lens to the housing needs of vulnerable women? The YWCA Niagara Region (YWCA) asked this question. Brock University's Niagara Community Observatory (NCO) partnered with the YWCA to identify the barriers to accessing safe and affordable housing in Niagara, with priority placed on community engagement and inclusive access to housing. The article has a two‐fold purpose. First, it provides an overview of community‐engaged research, focusing on the key principles and practices involved in listening to stories of women with lived expertise of homelessness facing discrimination or disadvantage compounded by intersectional identities of Indigeneity, race, gender and ability. Second, it reports on the making of a policy brief and video clip designed as advocacy tools for increasing awareness of the need for increased equitable access to safe and affordable housing for women and gender diverse peoples in Niagara.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.033 | 0.028 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.012 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".