THE ROLE OF TORONTO'S SETEEMENT HOUSES IN
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This manuscript has been reproduced from the microfilm master. UMI films the text dirediy from the original or copy subrnitted. mus, some thesis and dissertation copies are in typewrifer face, while others may be from any type of computer pn'nter. The quality of this reproductÏon is dependent upon the quality of the copy subrnitted. Broken or indistinct print, culored or poor quality illustrations and photographs, pnnt bleedthrough, substandard margins, and improper alignment can adversely affect reproduction. In the unlikely event that the author did not send UMI a camplete manuscript and there are missing pages. these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized copyright matenal had to be removed, a note w i H indicate the deletion. Oversize materials (e.g., rnaps, drawings, diarts) are reproduced by sectioning the original, beginning at the upper left-hand corner and continuing frum left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. Photographs included in the original manuscript have been reproduced xerographically in this copy. Higher quality 6 " x 9 " bladc and white photographic prints are available for any photographs or illusmons appeanng in this copy for an additional charge. Contact UMI directly to order.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 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".