MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2016756148 · doi:10.3141/2279-11

Assessing International Transferability of Highway Safety Manual Crash Prediction Algorithm and Its Components

2012· article· en· W2016756148 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Emanuele Sacchi, Bhagwant Persaud, Marco Bassani

Bibliographic record

VenueTransportation Research Record Journal of the Transportation Research Board · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTraffic and Road Safety
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaConnaught FundUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsTransferabilityCrashBaseline (sea)Computer scienceAlgorithmTransport engineeringCalibrationEngineeringMachine learningMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Highway Safety Manual (HSM) provides an algorithm and associated knowledge to predict crashes on different types of facilities. This algorithm requires calibration to current local conditions through a procedure prescribed in the HSM to enhance its transferability. However, no procedure assesses the transferability. To fill this void, this paper focuses on a methodology to assess the transferability of the key HSM algorithm components—the baseline safety performance function and the crash modification factors (CMFs)—and uses the Italian road network as an illustrative case study. The calibration of the HSM crash prediction model is investigated with a data set for two-lane two-way rural highways to demonstrate some tools that could be used by jurisdictions around the world to assess the validity and compatibility of the CMFs and the base models, as well as the performance of the complete algorithm. A comparison with the results from a similar study carried out in Canada is provided to supplement the conclusions on the transferability of the HSM algorithm outside the United States.

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)0.033
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.133
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 score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.176

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0330.133
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.361
Teacher spread0.288 · 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

Citations58
Published2012
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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