Bottom-Up Understanding of Informal Settlements: Perspectives of Urban Slum Dwellers in Nima, Ghana.
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
More than a quarter of the world’s population lives in informal settlements which house a rapidly growing proportion of the inhabitants of cities in sub-Saharan Africa, such as Accra, Ghana, and in the Global South more generally. However, scholars have shown that the urban planning and urban redevelopment strategies that affect these settlements are top-down in character with minimal resident participation. These prevailing planning and redevelopment strategies are based on the outsiders’ perceptions of informal neighborhoods, rendering them quite inefficient. Therefore, to develop workable policies and strategies that will improve the living condition of informal urban settlers, it is important to understand the social structure and lived experience of urban informality from the perspectives of residents of such spaces. Such an understanding requires careful attention to the residents’ perceptions of their environment, and their rationales for moving into or remaining in such communities. The qualitative method was favored for this study because it has the potential to highlight residents’ perceptions and rationales to unearth aspects of informal neighborhoods that have been missed by urban planners and local and national public officials.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it