MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6963699843 · doi:10.20381/ruor-29425

Community Resource Sharing and its Potential for Social Transformation

2023· other· en· W6963699843 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueuO Research (University of Ottawa) · 2023
Typeother
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWrightResource (disambiguation)Qualitative researchSocial transformationParticipant observationShared resourceTransformation (genetics)Social policySocial researchSocial innovation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This thesis studies a community fridge located in Ottawa, Canada, and explores the lived experiences of people who were regularly accessing it. It uses the theoretical framework for emancipatory social transformation developed by Erik Olin Wright to analyze and understand the potential that this novel initiative has for social transformation that moves away from capitalism. This research employed a qualitative case study approach that included interviews with eight regular fridge users, observations at the site of the fridge and at a community consultation for it, and document analysis to understand the background of the fridge better. The interview results included themes that explored motivation and experiences, community, crisis, consumption, the impact of the fridge, and social change. The results of this research when analyzed using Wright’s framework show that the community fridge introduced new potentialities for alternatives to capitalism, but on its own it did not inspire thoughts or actions outside of capitalism for the participants who were not already opposed to it before accessing it. This research concludes by presenting how the community fridge and other sharing initiatives like it could be integrated into and used in a broader strategy of emancipatory social transformation.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.377
Threshold uncertainty score0.750

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0230.042
Scholarly communication0.0110.006
Open science0.0020.016
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.000

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 head0.134
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueuO Research (University of Ottawa)→French-language works237,207→