MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1528390988

Pedestrian Safety In Québec

2007· article· en· W1528390988 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Lise Fournier, Louise Bonneau

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTraffic and Road Safety
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPedestrianTransport engineeringOccupational safety and healthPoison controlTruckInjury preventionPopulationSuicide preventionGeographyEngineeringEnvironmental healthMedicine
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

According to Societe de L'Assurance Automobile du Quebec statistics, in Quebec pedestrians comprise 13% of all road deaths, the highest number after car and light truck occupants. Of all pedestrian deaths in Quebec between 2000 and 2004, 27% occurred on the island of Montreal, which has the most pedestrian victims because of its large population. On the road network, on average, 4.4 pedestrians suffer minor, severe, or deadly accident injuries daily, and 24 pedestrians die annually, 44% of all Montreal road network deaths. About 3,500 pedestrians are killed or injured in Quebec traffic accidents annually, with roughly 450 serious injuries, and 100 deaths. The authors argue that safety record analysis should be done in respect to conditions in walking practices, an activity beneficial to health, in order to better understand the pedestrian safety issue. Road network managers will promote walking as a transportation form and improve pedestrian safety by placing priority on pedestrians in public environment design and redesign and harmoniously integrating, within urban areas, transportation networks and offering safe traveling conditions. A provincial pedestrian round table, infrastructure improvements, pedestrian signals, and other issues, including child pedestrians, are discussed.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.214

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0050.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0280.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.004
GPT teacher head0.188
Teacher spread0.184 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicTraffic and Road Safety→French-language works237,207→