MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1770502899 · doi:10.3846/bjrbe.2015.17

Road Safety and Pavement Management: a case study of Tanzania

2015· article· en· W1770502899 on OpenAlexaff
Luis Amador-Jiménez, Amir Pooyan Afghari

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Baltic Journal of Road and Bridge Engineering · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTraffic and Road Safety
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTransport engineeringPavement managementTanzaniaRoad surfaceCrashPoison controlRisk analysis (engineering)EngineeringComputer scienceCivil engineeringBusinessEnvironmental scienceEnvironmental planning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The implementation of pavement management seems to ignore road safety, with its focus being mainly on infrastructure condition. Safety management as part of pavement management should consider various means of reducing the frequency of vehicle crashes by allocating corrective measures to mitigate accident exposure, as well as reduce accident severity and likelihood. However, it is common that lack of accident records and crash contributing factors impedes incorporating safety into pavement management. This paper presents a case study for the initial development of pavement management systems considering data limitations for 3000 km of Tanzania’s national roads. A performance based optimization utilizes indices for safety and surface condition to allocate corrective measures. A modified Pareto analysis capable of accounting for annual performance and of balancing resources to achieve good surface condition and low levels of safety was applied. Tradeoff analysis for the case study found the need to assign 30% relevance to condition and 70% to road safety. Safety and condition deficiencies were corrected within 5 years with the majority of improvements dedicated to surface treatments and some geometric corrections. Large investments for correcting geo-metric issues were observed in years two and three if more money was made available.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.299
Threshold uncertainty score0.423

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.199 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations2
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Baltic Journal of Road and Bridge EngineeringSame topicTraffic and Road SafetyFrench-language works237,207