MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1964209420 · doi:10.3141/2140-08

Pedestrian Scramble Operations

2009· article· en· W1964209420 on OpenAlexaffabout
Lina Kattan, Shanti Acharjee, Richard Tay

Bibliographic record

VenueTransportation Research Record Journal of the Transportation Research Board · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTraffic and Road Safety
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPedestrianTransport engineeringIntersection (aeronautics)Pedestrian crossingDowntownSignageEngineeringComputer scienceSimulationGeographyBusinessAdvertising

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The City of Calgary, Alberta, Canada, has implemented a pilot test of the pedestrian scramble operation (also known as the Barnes dance) at two intersections in the downtown area. Pedestrian scramble is an exclusive pedestrian signal phase in which traffic in all four directions is stopped and pedestrians are allowed to make diagonal as well as lateral crossings. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the pilot project at one intersection to determine the effect of this new operation on pedestrian safety. Because of the absence of pedestrian–vehicle crashes in this study, the number of pedestrian conflicts was used as a surrogate measure of safety. Field observations were made 6 weeks after the implementation of the scramble operation. Two Poisson regression models were developed to model the number of conflicts and violations. The results showed that the number of pedestrian–vehicle conflicts decreased significantly but the number of pedestrian violations increased significantly after implementation of the scramble operation. The analysis also revealed that 13% of the total violations were “safe side” crossings (concurrent with the vehicle movement), 2% of the violations were “unsafe side” crossings, and about 40% of the total violations were at the beginning of the flashing “Don't Walk” phase (within 2 to 3 s) and persons were able to cross safely within the pedestrian phase. A survey was also conducted to monitor public perception, and the results showed a generally positive attitude toward this new signal operation. It is recommended that the operation be monitored over time and evaluated again.

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)0.002
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.838
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.068
GPT teacher head0.358
Teacher spread0.290 · 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 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

Citations43
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransportation Research Record Journal of the Transportation Research BoardSame topicTraffic and Road SafetyFrench-language works237,207