MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405028183 · doi:10.51594/ijarss.v6i12.1748

Comparative analysis of global social policy implementation for displaced communities: practical lessons for U.S. housing and education systems

2024· article· en· W4405028183 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Oyebimpe Onifade, Ngozi Samuel Uzougbo, Chidinma Favour Chikwe, Ayo Amen Ediae

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Applied Research in Social Sciences · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicUrban and Rural Development Challenges
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAffordable housingMainstreamGovernment (linguistics)Corporate governanceEconomic growthPublic relationsPolitical scienceBusinessPublic administrationEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper conducts a comparative analysis of global social policies to derive practical lessons for enhancing the U.S. housing and education systems in serving displaced communities. Drawing from case studies of countries such as Canada, Germany, and Uganda, the study highlights effective approaches, including integration into mainstream systems, community engagement, and tailored support services. It identifies systemic barriers in the U.S., such as insufficient affordable housing, inequitable education access, and fragmented governance, which hinder effective support for displaced populations. Policy recommendations include expanding affordable housing initiatives, strengthening educational support systems, fostering community-based sponsorship programs, and promoting collaborative frameworks across government and non-governmental stakeholders. By adopting global best practices, the U.S. can create inclusive, equitable, and sustainable systems that empower displaced individuals and families to achieve stability and long-term success. Keywords: Displaced Communities, Housing Policy, Education Systems, Social Integration, Global Best Practices.

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 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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.845
Threshold uncertainty score0.579

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
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 head0.374
GPT teacher head0.627
Teacher spread0.254 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Applied Research in Social SciencesSame topicUrban and Rural Development ChallengesFrench-language works237,207