Introduction: Neoliberalism in the Americas. Brutal experiments, distressful realities, and conspicuous contestations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This special issue was originally conceived as a conference organized at Duke University in January 2019, entitled “Neoliberalism in the Americas: Brutal Experiments, Distressful Realities, and Conspicuous Contestations. Re-thinking the South in the North and the North in the South.” The premise that inspired this reunion was, since Milton Friedman used dictatorial Chile as a laboratory for his monetary theories, neoliberalism has always been a matter that concerned the Americas as a continent. It has bound together Chicago and Santiago in one single package of authoritarian rule and unfettered capitalism, blemished with Nobel prizes, wealth concentration, and always-renewed, never-fulfilled promises of freedom and economic growth. Most of the articles were originally presented at the aforementioned conference, including a piece shared by one of the keynote speakers, Brazilian philosopher Vladimir Safatle. Nonetheless, we have also incorporated other contributions, such as an interview with Australian scholar Melinda Cooper. These works address neoliberalism from literature to psychoanalysis, from politics to gender and sexual identities, from historical and present-day investigations. The result is a multinational, transdisciplinary volume centered on the experiments of neoliberalization which, since the 1970s, connect the entire continent—ultimately reaching the extent of a truly global experience.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.010 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.024 | 0.004 |
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".