Bibliographic record
Abstract
The careers of 'Australia's last bushrangers', Patrick and James Kenniff, culminated in a showdown at Lethbridge's Pocket on Easter Sunday 1902, leaving two men dead. A massive manhunt resulted in the Kenniffs being captured near Mitchell, and their subsequent trial for wilful murder in the Queensland Supreme Court. The presiding judge, Chief Justice Sir Samuel Griffith, was one of the defining figures of Australia's history: a Premier of Queensland, a leading federationist, a major contributor to the drafting of the national Constitution, and first Chief Justice of the new nation's High Court. He also drafted the Queensland Criminal Code, under which the Kenniffs were tried, which came into effect on 1 January 1901. Yet there is a real question whether the Kenniffs received justice. They were denied a trial before a 'jury of their peers'. Their lawyer was barely competent. Significant procedural irregularities occurred. The trial judge, Griffith, also presided at their appeal, despite having announced that he agreed entirely with the jury's verdict. Applying modern legal standards, the prosecution should not have succeeded. Even by the standards of the time, justice was not seen to be done.
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 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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".