THE QUEBEC GRADUATED LICENSING SYSTEM FOR NOVICE DRIVERS: A TWO-YEAR EVALUATION OF THE 1997 REFORM
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Since July 1997, the revised Quebec graduated licensing system (GLS) encompasses a learning period (accompanying rider, zero BAC and ceiling of 4 demerit points) of 12 months for all new drivers, with the possibility of reducing it to 8 months by taking a driving course, and a probationary period (zero BAC and ceiling of 4 demerit points) of two years applying only to drivers under 25 years of age. Prior to the 1997 reform, the Quebec GLS had only minor restrictions (ceiling of 10 demerit points instead of 15 for a regular licence). This paper presents an evaluation of the 1997 reform using a before/after design (2 years/2 years) with a comparison group. The record of the GLS group (learner and probationary) is compared to a non-GLS group composed of all young drivers (18-24 year-olds) holding a regular licence. Using the same design, preliminary results have shown that the net one-year effect of the revised GLS was to reduce fatalities by 32.8% and injuries by 15.1%. The two-year evaluation found a 4.9% reduction in fatalities and a 14.4% reduction in injuries. Possible reasons for this disparity between results are discussed and for the first time, the study evaluated the impact of Zero Alcohol on collision involvement. For the covering abstract see ITRD E106992.
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 | 0.017 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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.
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".