MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2079017080 · doi:10.1068/d2604ks

<i>The Shock Doctrine</i> : A Discussion

2008· article· en· W2079017080 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Naomi Klein, Neil Smith

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironment and Planning D Society and Space · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDisaster Management and Resilience
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDoctrineRelation (database)Argument (complex analysis)Latin AmericansMetropolitan areaNeoliberalism (international relations)Shock (circulatory)CapitalismPolitical scienceKey (lock)SociologyMedia studiesLawHistoryPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this discussion of her book The Shock Doctrine (2007, Metropolitan Books), Naomi Klein outlines a number of its key themes and brings the argument to bear on the California wildfires and developments in Latin America. Key issues discussed include the relation between disaster capitalism and creative destruction, natural disasters, neoliberalism, the antiglobalisation movement, the ‘9/11 truth’ campaign, and the relation of this book to her earlier No Logo (2000, Knopf Canada). Questions come from Neil Smith and from the audience at the Graduate Center, CUNY.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.050

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0070.026
Scholarly communication0.0060.011
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0070.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.222 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations32
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironment and Planning D Society and SpaceSame topicDisaster Management and ResilienceFrench-language works237,207