Mobilong Independent Living Units: New Innovations in Australian Prison Architecture
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In 2004, when the Department for Correctional Services recognized the need to expand the Mobilong prison facility, it decided to undertake radical and innovative changes to set a new standard for correctional facilities. The resulting correctional facility development contains 10 duplex housing units that have 5 bedrooms arranged around a common living space that includes a kitchen, bathroom, and securable veranda area. Five inmates live in each duplex to allow for group voting processes. Inmates living in the duplexes assume responsibility for meal preparation, ordering supplies, laundry, and cleaning. The development uses efficient sustainable environmental development solutions and passive environmental principles, such as vertical windows to allow for a connection to the external environment and solar hot water systems. The buildings, which are oriented along the east-west axis for solar radiation, are arranged around a court area that has a garden and public telephones. The facility meets the safe cell design recommendations of the Victorian Building Design Review Project and includes touches such as recessed lighting, sloped knobs and water taps, and rounded edges. Safety features include the use of steel sheeting and steel-reinforced concrete block work and vertical windows with openings of approximately 5 inches to preclude a window escape. The duplex design of the Mobilong Prison represents a new alternative to the traditional cell block facilities and demonstrates the capacity to create humane and secure correctional environments. Photographs, endnotes
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 | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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".