MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7036906859

Concepts of "community" in Community Economic Development : the social dynamics of community-based development in Winnipeg's inner city

2006· dissertation· en· W7036906859 on OpenAlexfundaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueMspace (University of Manitoba) · 2006
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMedical Image Segmentation Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsNucleofectionTSG101HyporeflexiaGestational periodDiafiltrationFusible alloyArticular cartilage damageProteogenomics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Community Economic Development (CED) is an alternative form of development that assesses the social and economic needs of a community and engages community members in the creation of locally relevant development initiatives. Many communities in Winnipeg's North End are pursuing CED initiatives to address the problems of poverty, unemployment and violence. Although the concept of "community" evokes images of unity and cooperation, communities are composed of diverse individuals, groups and agendas. CED organizations must understand the unique forms of community belonging in their target communities. This understanding will increase awareness of the factors that influence exclusion and inclusion in communities and their impacts on community development. In this thesis I explore the meanings of "community" to North End community members and CED organization staff, and the ways in which CED organizations and community members negotiate these diverse concepts of "community" to imagine and implement constructive, communal and sustainable development initiatives.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.522
Threshold uncertainty score0.950

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0150.017
Scholarly communication0.0080.003
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.242 · 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
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMspace (University of Manitoba)Same topicMedical Image Segmentation TechniquesFrench-language works237,207