Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the not-so-distant past, middle-class families could reasonably achieve homeownership in the Greater Toronto Area (GTA); however, that expectation is now far from possible. Over the last decade, the cost of homeownership has been steadily rising at an unreasonable rate. Population growth has outstripped supply, and available housing is not designed for families. Wages have not kept pace with housing prices, and renting has become an insecure lifestyle. Innovations in size, materials and social constructs are few and far between. However, affordable solutions, such as purpose-built rentals, co-ops, and low-rise multi-unit buildings, have been squeezed out of the supply. \n \nThe housing system status quo, squeezing out innovators and non-market solutions, has been driven by the downloading of housing responsibilities to municipalities that were beholden to local interests and not equipped to solve collective problems. Change-adverse neighbourhood associations have leveraged their power over municipalities to preserve the character of their neighbourhoods, complicate the approval process, and oppose new approaches. In this system, the escalating prices and single-family dominant housing type have reinforced the housing-as-an-investment paradigm, fuelling the crisis. \n \nIn order to build a more fair, just, and equitable housing system, we need multiple interventions to re-balance supply with demand, improve the approval process, and empower innovators and non-market solution providers, all while challenging the commoditization of housing.
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 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 | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.011 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.010 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.002 |
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 teacher head, 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".