Analysis of 110 km/hr Speed Limit: Implementation on Saskatchewan Divided Rural Highways
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper will assess the short-term on driver speeds after increasing the posted speed limit on rural four-lane highways in Saskatchewan. On June 1, 2003 the maximum speed limit on select sections of Saskatchewan twinned highways was increased from 100 km/hr to 110 km/hr. Spot speed studies were conducted at representative locations before and after the speed limit increase, during the period from April 2003 to September 2003. While the majority of the data collected was on the four-lane highway system, data was also collected on two-lane highway sections to identify any possible halo effects where speed limits were not increased. Data collected at the study sites before the increase indicated that the 100 km/hr speed limit was well below the average driver speed and 85th percentile speed. Data collected after the speed limit increase showed only a minimal increase in average driver speeds, 85th percentile speeds, and pace speeds, while the average increase in speed differential was found to be minimal. The speed limit increase appears to have created a higher driver compliance rate, at least in the short term. The increased compliance rate does not necessarily reflect a change in driver behavior, but may be the result of a change in how compliance is measured. Speed profiles on two-lane highways only showed small changes in vehicle speed characteristics. Overall, raising the posted speed limit has had a lesser effect on driver speeds than anticipated. Due to the short duration of the study, additional studies are recommended to further identify vehicle speed trends and possible changes in collision profiles. For the covering abstract of this conference see ITRD number E211395.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".