Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Committee on Invalid Pensions, having had under consideration the petition and papers of Thomas Bronough, have come to the conclusior1.to submit the following report: "rhe petitioner alleges, under oath, that he entered the service of the United States in the year 1813, as a substitute for Joseph Reynolds, in the 63d regiment of the Kentucky militia, in Captain Kerr's company, having served six months previously.That he was in the battle of Dudley's defeat, and was there wounded in his shoulder and side, and taken prisoner by the Indians; and was marched from there a prisoner, through snow and on frozen ground, to ''Quebec;" and his feet were frozen, so that the ends of his toes consequently dropped off.That he was held in captivity at Quebec until May, 1814."rhat after he was liberated and returned home, he was discharged-which discharge is appended to his declaration.That his papers praying for a pension were made out in 1838, and were handed to the "Hon.Simeon Anderson," member of Congress from Kentucky; that said Anderson died, and he has never been able to find his said papers.H e also alleges that all the officers under whom he served are dead, and can .not prove by any person that he was wounded in that battle, because it was done by the Indians who carried him off a prisoner; and swears that, in consequence of said wounds then received, he is, and has been since that time, disabled to do much labor, and is consequently in indigent circu m• stances.James Tinsely deposes and says, that he has known petitioner many years prior to 1813; that he went into the United States service as a private in Captain Kerr's company, and knows that he was wounded in the
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.820 | 0.668 |
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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.
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".