MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7025734251

What Would it Take? Youth Across Canada Speak Out on Youth Homelessness Prevention

2018· report· en· W7025734251 on OpenAlex

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueYork University Digital Library (York University) · 2018
Typereport
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicAlgebraic and Geometric Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGovernment (linguistics)Youth studiesOrder (exchange)Young adultYouth engagementPositive Youth DevelopmentSuicide preventionCoalition government
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Are we making significant headway on youth homelessness in Canada? Are we stopping young people from becoming homeless? Are we ensuring that young people transition out of homelessness quickly, and that they do not become homeless again? It is time that we started taking a good, hard look at these questions. In our efforts to end homelessness, we have primarily focused on providing emergency services and supports to young people while they are homeless. Unfortunately, this hasn’t gotten us the results we want. Youth homelessness in Canada is an ongoing problem for which we seem to be making slow but insufficient progress. It is time to consider a new approach – the prevention of youth homelessness. The What Would it Take? study asked young people with lived experience of homelessness: what would it take to prevent youth homelessness in Canada? Between July 2017 and January 2018, A Way Home Canada and the Canadian Observatory on Homelessness consulted with youth across Canada to ask: - What would have prevented your homelessness? - What programs, policies, services, and supports are needed to prevent youth homelessness? - What do you want to tell the Canadian government about preventing youth homelessness? - How do you want to be involved in making change on this issue? The purpose of this report is to amplify the voices, insights, and wisdom of these young people in order to drive policy and practice change. In our efforts to end homelessness, we have primarily focused on providing emergency services and supports to young people while they are homeless. While this is important and generally well-meaning, we need to question whether this is enough; whether waiting for young people to become homeless before we help them is both sufficient and the right thing to do. In considering how we might reform our response to youth homelessness, young people with lived experience of homelessness need to have their voices heard. Their valuable insights drawn from their experiences can challenge our current thinking and point to a new approach that more effectively helps young people before they end up on the streets. Read the report for youth insights on how we can prevent youth homelessness in Canada.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.218
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.005
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.071
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.176 · 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