Bibliographic record
Abstract
Daily practices of bioterrorism preparedness are producing a security community in which citizens are bound together by common biological risk, access to care during times of crisis, and the ability and authority to provide care in an emergency. Through the study of national-level exercise programmes and city-wide preparedness plans in Albuquerque, New Mexico, this ethnographic research asks how communities are materially and ideologically organized around the idea of mitigating biological risk. The dual acts of planning for bioterrorism and simulating a response prescribe a distinct role for government in caring for a population, and not just during times of crisis. This paper explores the outcomes of publicly rehearsing the care practices of government through bioterror simulation by considering how restructuring health systems around the idea of biopreparedness confounds the specter of war with life-giving acts of health care, offering citizens a way of living within the state of emergency. Les activités quotidiennes de la préparation au bioterrorisme produisent une communauté sécurité où les citoyens sont unis par un risque biologique commun, assurés qu’on veille sur eux en temps de crise et qu’ils ont accès à des gens d’expérience et à des personnes en place qui peuvent les aider en cas d’urgence. Par le truchement d’études de programmes d’exercice et de préparation dans toute la ville d’Albuquerque, au Nouveau-Mexique, cette recherche ethnographique cherche à savoir comment les communautés sont matériellement et idéologiquement organisées en matière d’atténuation des risques biologiques. La double fonction de planification en cas de bioterrorisme et de simulation d’une intervention appropriée prévoit un rôle gouvernemental distinct dans l’aide apportée à une population, et non seulement en temps de crise. Le présent article analyse les résultats de l’exercice public des pratiques d’assistance du gouvernement lors d’une simulation d’attaque bioterroriste et examine comment la restructuration du système de santé en fonction de l’idée de biopréparation confond le spectre de la guerre et des soins de santé porteurs de vie, qui offrent aux citoyens un mode de vie lors en cas d’urgence.
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 | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".