MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2063281086 · doi:10.2495/sdp-v10-n2-258-266

A concern about younger drivers in Perth

2015· article· en· W2063281086 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Zuhair Ebrahim, Hamid Nikraz

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Sustainable Development and Planning · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTraffic and Road Safety
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSAFERSpeed limitAuditEnforcementPedestrianCrashTransport engineeringGeographyBusinessEngineeringPolitical scienceComputer securityComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper highlights the concerns about younger drivers in Perth.Evidence suggests that this group of drivers were speeding at different levels particularly the highly excessive.Despite 60 km/h being considered a higher speed limit than the other two limits under this study, it was found that younger drivers are speeding and taking higher risks on roads that belong to the 40 and 50 km/h speed limits.The 'On the spot' detection found roads, which belong to 50 km/h, were also of concern.Male drivers were dominating the speeding on roads for the three speed limits roads studied.Pedestrian crash data also supported this evidence in concluding that the leading number of drivers who hit pedestrians belongs to this younger age group.Speeding and pedestrian crashes on 40 km/h on non-school zone roads are also examined and discussed.It is recommended that along with enforcement, two levels policy need to be targeted in parallel.First, a safety audit to the 50 and 60 km/h limits as a comprehensive municipal programme that may lower the limits to a safer speed on these roads needs to be adopted.Second, authorities may focus on younger drivers' licence regulations in terms of speeding violations and accidents history and real scenario training that relates to that age group.Such policy direction may bring high returns in sustaining safer roads.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.054
Threshold uncertainty score0.106

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.222 · 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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Sustainable Development and Planning→Same topicTraffic and Road Safety→French-language works237,207→