A Study of Crash Rates for Vehicles with Advanced Crash Avoidance Features
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper describes how information available through the OnStar system represents a unique and powerful mechanism to assess field crash rates. Included within is a description of how vehicle and OnStar information may be gathered, organized and analyzed. The resulting data provides the capability to conducts various studies of field activity and/or events. In this case, a study was conducted to try to determine if certain vehicle equipment might have an impact on field crash rates. The process is exemplified via a description of a study conducted by GM OnStar in 2009. Two analyses were conducted comparing crash rates of selected vehicle models, with and without certain advanced safety sensing and warning features. Specifically, beginning in the 2008 Model Year, General Motors introduced Lane Departure Warning and Side Blind Zone Alert into US/Canada production. Utilizing data on crashes, drawn from OnStar Automatic Crash Response events, analyses of crash rates were conducted. A description of the steps used to identify study vehicles, the data gathering processes used and the crash rate analysis are detailed. Study findings indicate that the presence of these features does appear to have a positive impact on crash rates.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".