MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409793579 · doi:10.61091/jcmcc127a-160

Supportive Strategies and Empirical Research on Housing Policies for the Improvement of the Living Environment of Special Needs Groups under the Social Security Framework

2025· article· en· W4409793579 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Combinatorial Mathematics and Combinatorial Computing · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMedical Research and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSocial securityBusinessEmpirical researchEnvironmental resource managementSociologyPolitical scienceEconomicsEpistemology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Due to the continuous increase of housing prices in recent years, many special groups of low and middle income do not have enough financial ability to pay for the high housing prices, and the problem of living environment is becoming more and more prominent.Based on the utility function in economic theory, this paper constructs a utility function model under the constraints of household budget income and price, and determines the income line of housing security households.The distributional efficiency of the implementation of the guaranteed housing policy is estimated through both in-kind rent allocation and rent subsidy.Based on the empirical distribution characteristics and public opinion surveys, a rational distribution model for the current stage of sheltered housing is proposed.Taking Singapore's guaranteed housing policy as a case study, combining empirical evidence and simulation experiments, the effect of improving the living environment of special needs groups under the framework of social security is explored.The results show that: using a 10% allocation ratio of subsidised housing (5% each for affordable housing and public rental housing), the vacancy rate of public rental housing shows an oscillating state in the period of 7~16.In the period from 16 to 20, it shows a gradual increase.Therefore, this guaranteed housing policy should be gradually adjusted or cancelled around period 16.

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)0.003
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.037
Threshold uncertainty score0.517

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.399
Teacher spread0.343 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Combinatorial Mathematics and Combinatorial ComputingSame topicMedical Research and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207