Bibliographic record
Abstract
At the outset, committee members whimsically took to calling homosexuals and prostitutes ‘Huntleys’ and ‘Palmers’, after the brand of biscuits. This practice, apparently to save the blushes of the female stenographers, was relatively shortlived; the graphic nature of the witness statements would have made it redundant. But in the early months the committee had to decide whether it wanted to interview any of these Huntleys, in full committee or smaller gatherings, and—if so—what type of Huntley. 1 The correspondence between Wolfenden and the secretary, Conwy Roberts, indicates a willingness to entertain the idea but no great enthusiasm. A number of Huntleys wrote offering their services; correspondence and informal meetings took place. 2 Some could be easily dismissed—there was no evidence that one R. Devereux Shirley, for example, was qualified to ‘represent the beliefs and needs of the big majority of the 500,000 homosexuals in Great Britain’ 3 —while others were more promising. Roberts thought that ‘an invert in a responsible University post’ who came to see him was just the ‘very decent sort of chap’ who would be suitable: unlike many with his ‘particular disability’ he had no axe to grind and was ‘the personification, in fact, of the D. P. P.’s “genuine” homosexual!’ 4 Nevertheless, when it came time to organize some full interviews with homosexuals in the summer of 1955, Wolfenden’s priorities lay with the other scheduled witnesses; the homosexuals could be offered whatever time might be left over. Roberts even suggested that, ‘If the idea is merely to let the Committee see what a few Huntleys look and behave like, then the proceedings could be informally conducted over a cup of tea.’ Wolfenden demurred at this: since two of the men were rather distinguished blokes, if the committee were going to put itself to the trouble of seeing them at all, it ought to be reasonably thorough about it. 5 These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.095 | 0.016 |
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".