Building a cohesive society:the case of Singapore's housing policies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Key Points→ At independence, Singapore faced race riots and very poor initial conditions, but built a wealthy and cohesive society in only five decades.→ The provision of almost universal public housing combined with an ethnic residential quota system was instrumental in this achievement.→ The quota system was introduced in 1989 in response to evidence that ethnic groups tended to re-segregate.It was implemented mostly through the flow of new public housing to minimize the impact on exiting owners and to increase acceptance.→ Public housing in Singapore is affordable and attractive.In addition to the ethnic quota, it promotes social integration by mixing types of flats and income levels, providing quality shared public spaces and services and ensuring that no neighbourhood becomes disadvantaged and is left behind.→ These challenges test Tsipras's promise to make Greece "normal" again.Without further reform to improve the entrepreneurial climate and attract investment, the Greek economy risks being trapped in a low-growth equilibrium.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.028 | 0.016 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.013 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".