A structural inquiry on ageing and death in Canadian cities: the case of the homeless elderly
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Research on aging, death and homelessness as a whole is rife with difficulty, yet its joint study is integral to better comprehend the experience of the vulnerable elderly in society as they near the end of their life. To better situate our understanding of aging, death and homelessness together, a thematic review of the North-American literature was conducted around these joint phenomena and contextualized with regards to Canadian public services and provisions for the homeless. The analysis was guided by a foulcadian conceptual frame of thought. Through this process, we came to identify 3 tendencies of public discourse and practices concurrently marginalizing the aging homeless population: 1) the political and epidemiological narratives mostly endorse the “successful aging” approach which frames social needs under a moralistic conception of individual responsibility, 2) by focusing on autonomy and social reinsertion, Canadian public provisions fail to respond to the needs of the elderly homeless individual and serve more to hide their death than to support their end-of-life and 3) by identifying its services users through their socioeconomic status, institutionalized healthcare contributes to the experience of “social death” by the aging homeless as they approach their end-of-life and are denied the same quality of care.
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 | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.055 | 0.034 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| 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".