MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2014348724 · doi:10.1080/15568310801915559

The Effectiveness of Automated and Manned Traffic Enforcement

2009· article· en· W2014348724 on OpenAlexafffund
Richard Tay

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Sustainable Transportation · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTraffic and Road Safety
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersAlberta Motor Association Foundation for Traffic SafetyCentre for Transportation Engineering and Planning
KeywordsEnforcementLaw enforcementDeterrence theoryComputer securityDifferential (mechanical device)Transport engineeringPopulationPoison controlBusinessEngineeringAeronauticsComputer sciencePolitical scienceMedicineEnvironmental healthLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study adds to the current debate on speeding and speed enforcement by examining the differential impacts of automated and manned speed enforcements on motor vehicle crashes using data from the Australian State of Queensland. We found that while manned enforcement has a significant impact on both total and serious crashes, automated enforcement only has an effect on total crashes. Our evidence also suggests that whereas manned enforcement provides specific deterrence targeted at the high-risk drivers, automated enforcement provides a general deterrence effect on a broad spectrum of the driving population, which may partially explain the differential effects observed.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.002
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.212 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations42
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Sustainable TransportationSame topicTraffic and Road SafetyFrench-language works237,207