MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7000731965

Fostering a Sense of Belonging in Toronto – A Case Study of Dixon

2022· dissertation· en· W7000731965 on OpenAlexaffabout

Bibliographic record

VenueUWSpace (University of Waterloo) · 2022
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPlace Attachment and Urban Studies
Canadian institutionsOntario Drive & Gear (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSomaliNeighbourhood (mathematics)DistrustPerceptionSense of communityRefugeePower (physics)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Using the neighbourhood of Dixon as a case study, this project examines what factors influence Dixon residents’ sense of belonging to their neighbourhood. Interviews conducted with twelve residents outline how characteristics such as a lack of up-keeping of the neighbourhood’s physical state, a negative public perception of the community formed by media outlets, and hyper-policing initiatives within the neighbourhood all contribute towards a negative impact on residents’ quality of life by influencing their relationship with their space, their community, and themselves. The paper expands on this notion by examining the deep-rooted history of othering experienced by Dixon residents, dating back to the 1990’s when Somali refugee claimants initially settled into Dixon, earning it the nickname Little Mogadishu. This study is concerned with the lived experiences of Dixon residents and how various forms of political, social, and economic othering of their community has shaped their perception of place-belongingness, as well as their distrust in any body of power that can challenge their ability to foster a sense of belonging to their neighbourhood.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.231
Threshold uncertainty score0.465

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0310.009
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.270 · 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 designQualitative
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
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUWSpace (University of Waterloo)Same topicPlace Attachment and Urban StudiesFrench-language works237,207