The Effect of Type of Attributes on the Fill-Ability of Accident Reporting Forms (ARF)
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Accident Reporting Form (ARF) is the basic building block of an Accident Database. Incorrect and incomplete forms result into the formation of erroneous database which contains partial or no essential information required for the statistical analysis of accident data. Policies made on the basis of the results of such databases will have little or no effect on the improvement of safety of roadway facilities. In most countries filling of the ARF is the responsibility of Police/Investigating officers. Due to lack of interest, all the details are not recorded by them. Thus, it is very important to investigate the type of attributes and their respective items filled most. The objective of this study is to evaluate the attributes given most importance by the person in charge of filling the ARF and the items most neglected. The probable reasons for the complete/incomplete recording of the details of certain items were also examined. For this study a total of 642 forms were obtained from the Malaysian Institute of Road Safety Research (MIROS) for evaluation. Each form contained 91 attributes, as per number given in the accident reporting form known as POL 27. The items were divided with respect to driver, passenger, vehicle, pedestrian, location, road environment, road information and additional information. The fill-ability for each item was estimated in terms of percent filled. The items were evaluated in terms of least and most filled and the probable reason for the complete/incomplete filling of each item was then investigated. It was found that items related to location were most neglected. The second most incomplete items were associated with the vehicle and the driver. While the attributes related to the road and the environment were found to be the most filled. The probable reason for lack of fill-ability of location related items was their placement in inappropriate sections. The important finding of this study is the high number of items in the POL 27 which makes it difficult for the officer to fill the form completely and is the major cause of reduced fill-ability.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».