U.S. Hegemony in the 21<sup>st</sup>century: Cuba's Place in the regionalizing geopolitics of North America and Caribbean Countries
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper is concerned with the implications of U.S. hegemony upon the strategic location of regional geo‐economic and geopolitical borders in North America and its neighbors. In a case study which uses U.S. foreign policy towards Cuba as a measure of the regional influence of American hegemonic pressure, the paper explores the way in which extraterritorial policies like the Helms Burton Act, transnational intergovernmental economic structures like NAFTA, or border accords and agreements like the ‘Third Border,’ both influence and respond to U.S. ‘Cuban policy.’ It raises question such as how, in doing so, do they contribute to the discourse and practice of U.S. hemispheric domination? Or, how can we evaluate the degree to which these foreign policy and transnational agreements, in asserting hegemony, influence the contours of existing ‘regional boundaries’ in North America in the post 9/11 era?
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".