Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This essay attempts to establish a basis from which to explore the relationship between neoliberalism and the novel and thus attempts to provide a provisional answer to the question this special issue seeks to engage: What is a neoliberal novel? The essay argues that to speak of the neoliberal novel is one way of saying ‘the novel after postmodernism’. The notion of a ‘neoliberal novel’ conceives of the relation between its constitutive terms in such a way as to allow us to locate the periodisation of the novel not simply in an external, material determination but in the complex interplay of the formal relations between the market, social, and political structures and culture. The notion of a neoliberal novel can provide us with one concrete marker of a development in the novel after postmodernism that attempts to periodise the novel via both external and its own immanent history, thus avoiding both simple chronology and chronological markers and non-sequiturs like post-postmodernism. It is also a way of articulating a set of contradictions inasmuch as the novel, as the essay illustrates, remains constitutively incongruous with neoliberalism. We know that there are novels that simply replicate the logic of neoliberalism. But instead of suggesting some universal dead end or impossibility for the novel itself, conceiving of the relation between neoliberalism and the novel along the lines suggested in this essay illustrates that these are novels that are not only bad at dealing with neoliberalism, but, more importantly, that they are novels that are bad at being novels.
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.
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) | 0.000 | 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 it