MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2133539059 · doi:10.1177/0272989x14526642

The Fallacy of Interpreting Deaths and Driving Distances

2014· editorial· en· W2133539059 on OpenAlexafffund
Donald A. Redelmeier

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Decision Making · 2014
Typeeditorial
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTraffic and Road Safety
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreUniversity of TorontoInstitute for Clinical Evaluative SciencesSunnybrook Health Science Centre
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsCasualNoticeDemographyTransport engineeringGeographyActuarial scienceEngineeringPolitical scienceBusinessLawSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

statistics on traffic fatalities in the United States. The summary report emphasized that the fatality rate had decreased to a historic low of 1.10 deaths per 100 million vehicle-miles traveled.1 The top graphic vividly showed a 75 % decline in traffic risks during the last 4 decades in the United States (Figure 1). In the accompanying press release, then Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood summarized, ‘‘The latest numbers show how the tireless work of our safety agencies and partners, coupled with significant advances in technology and continued public education, can really make a difference on our roadways.’’2 These data suggest a large and sustained improvement in road safety, reassuring to motorists, regulators, and expert

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Editorial · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.665
Threshold uncertainty score0.809

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.249
Teacher spread0.247 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEditorial

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

Citations10
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical Decision MakingSame topicTraffic and Road SafetyFrench-language works237,207