MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2141234399 · doi:10.3141/2147-06

Large-Scale Automated Analysis of Vehicle Interactions and Collisions

2010· article· en· W2141234399 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueTransportation Research Record Journal of the Transportation Research Board · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTraffic and Road Safety
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaPolytechnique Montréal
FundersKentucky Transportation Cabinet
KeywordsCollisionComputer scienceProbabilistic logicIdentification (biology)Set (abstract data type)Scale (ratio)Probabilistic analysis of algorithmsArtificial intelligenceGeographyCartographyComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Road collisions are a worldwide pandemic that can be addressed through the improvement of existing tools for safety analysis. A refined probabilistic framework is presented for the analysis of road-user interactions. In particular, the identification of potential collision points is used to estimate collision probabilities, and their spatial distribution can be visualized. A probabilistic time to collision is introduced, and interactions are grouped into four categories: head-on, rear-end, side, and parallel. The framework is applied to a large data set of video recordings collected in Kentucky that contains more than 300 severe interactions and collisions. The results demonstrate the usefulness of the approach for studying road-user behavior and mechanisms that may lead to collisions.

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.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.117
Threshold uncertainty score0.928

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.355
Teacher spread0.322 · 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