Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Association of Drivers against Daytime Running Lights (DaDRL), based in northwest Wales, is a pressure group with the sole purpose of fighting the use of headlights in the daytime. Membership is rising. The main complaint is that using lights in the daytime causes dazzle to other drivers and make cyclists, motorcyclists and pedestrians more vulnerable. The issue is becoming more important as daytime running lights (DRL) may become mandatory in the USA and Europe in a bid to save lives and reduce accidents. DRLs are compulsory in some countries, such as Canada, Denmark, Norway and Sweden. A study by NHTSA and a review financed by the European Commission have concluded that DRLs reduce multiparty daytime crashes by 5-23%, but these figures have been refuted by the British Motorcyclists Federation and DaDRL. DaDRL also suggests that using conventional DRLs increases carbon emissions, but that light emitting diodes (LEDs) would reduce the environmental impact of DRLs.
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 | 0.005 | 0.036 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.014 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.115 | 0.064 |
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".