MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Community-Based, Macrolevel Collision Prediction Model Use with a Regional Transportation Plan

2009· article· en· W2135274264 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Gord Lovegrove, Clark Lim, Tarek Sayed

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Transportation Engineering · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTraffic and Road Safety
Canadian institutionsOkanagan University CollegeUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan CampusUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPlan (archaeology)Transport engineeringCollisionComputer scienceTransportation planningProcess (computing)EngineeringGeographyComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper describes the application of previously developed community-based, macrolevel collision prediction models (CPMs) to evaluate the road safety of a regional transportation plan. The research objective was to present and test model-use guidelines in a regional road safety planning application. The data was extracted from over 400 Greater Vancouver neighborhoods in British Columbia, Canada, including output from the regional transportation model. The CPMs predicted a lower mean collision frequency region-wide due to a proposed three-year transportation plan, versus a do-nothing scenario. Recommendations have been made for future use of the CPMs in regional road safety planning applications. The application of macrolevel CPMs to this regional case study proved a solid step in the development of new and improved empirical tools for planners and engineers to include road safety in the planning process. It is hoped that these models and model-use guidelines will facilitate improved decisions by community planners and engineers, and ultimately, facilitate improved neighborhood traffic safety for residents and other road users.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.229
Threshold uncertainty score0.455

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.199
Teacher spread0.179 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations21
Published2009
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Transportation EngineeringSame topicTraffic and Road SafetyFrench-language works237,207