Aspects macrogéographiques des accidents de la route : essai de comparaison Québec-Belgique
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cet article a pour objectif de démontrer, par comparaison, que la structure spatiale des accidents de la route est indépendante du pays dans lequel le phénomène est mesuré et que seul le facteur d'échelle constitue une différence. Les entités spatiales choisies pour cette démonstration sont le Québec et la Belgique. La structure spatiale des accidents de la route est modélisée et comparée sur la base de trois variables à expliquer et de quatre variables potentiellement explicatives, définissant 52 districts belges et 97 municipalités régionales de comté (MRC) et communautés urbaines (CU) québécoises pour l'année 1991. Les résultats indiquent certaines similitudes quant à la structure spatiale de la densité d'accidents, des taux d'accidents et des taux de mortalité et une différence relative à la structure spatiale de la motorisation. Au Québec comme en Belgique, la densité de population se révèle un bon prédicteur de la densité d'accidents corporels et des taux de mortalité.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".