MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1976953978 · doi:10.3141/1980-06

Driver Response to Rainfall on Urban Expressways

2006· article· en· W1976953978 on OpenAlexafffund
Daniel Unrau, Jean Andrey

Bibliographic record

VenueTransportation Research Record Journal of the Transportation Research Board · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTraffic and Road Safety
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersInstitute for Catastrophic Loss Reduction
KeywordsEnvironmental scienceTraffic volumeDaytimeTraffic flow (computer networking)OccupancyTraffic speedMeteorologyTravel timePoison controlVolume (thermodynamics)Flow (mathematics)Transport engineeringAtmospheric sciencesComputer scienceEngineeringGeographyMathematicsGeologyCivil engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The effects of light rainfall on urban freeway operations are modeled to improve understanding of road safety and speed-flow-occupancy relationships in suboptimal weather. Three broader issues also are addressed. What is the form of the relationship among various traffic variables under rainy versus dry conditions? Are the safety implications of driver adjustments under rainy conditions different for the day and night? How should speed variation be measured in ecological studies? Volume-occupancy and speed-volume relationships are affected by rainfall: specifically, speeds are reduced and speed is more strongly dependent on volume. Under nighttime, rainy, uncongested conditions, speeds are reduced and time gaps are increased, but only minimally. Under daytime rainfall conditions, when traffic volumes are typically high, speeds are reduced substantially, and because of the interaction between traffic variables, volumes also decrease. The physical time gap increases marginally as well, whereas speed variability within the traffic stream is reduced. For congested daytime conditions, light rainfall is not associated with any changes in volume or time gap, but speeds are reduced. Finally, safety-related information on speed deviation can be derived from traffic loop data by calculating the variability of travel speeds within small time units.

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)0.004
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 score0.739
Threshold uncertainty score0.952

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.279 · 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

Citations50
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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