Contextualizing Black (Dis)Placement in Ontario through Systems of Housing, Homelessness and Incarceration
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Plantation logics continue to insidiously permeate various levels of contemporary society. Even some of the most intimate of spaces, such as the home, are not free from the pervasive legacies and the continuation of colonial practices. Chattel slavery marked the beginning of the racialized and systemic placement and displacement of Black people, resulting in large and small-scale placelessness. This article explores Black (dis)placement in Ontario through three primary systems: public housing, homelessness and incarceration. The author provides a multidisciplinary critical analysis that investigates the convergences and divergences between the public housing sector and the prison system in Toronto while also considering the third liminal space of homelessness. Not only are these spaces explored independently, but their functioning as an ecosystem is explored through what the author calls the Carceral Domiciliate Network (CDN). The CDN refers to the ways in which Black people’s living spaces are largely restricted to prison, public housing, and the liminal space of homelessness. Rather than functioning idiosyncratically, together, these systems’ policies communicate with one another in a way that makes it difficult to escape its matrix.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.034 | 0.023 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".