Severity of pedestrian injuries due to traffic crashes at signalized intersections in Hong Kong: a Bayesian spatial logit model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Summary The present study intended to (1) investigate the injury risk of pedestrian casualties involved in traffic crashes at signalized intersections in Hong Kong; (2) determine the effect of pedestrian volumes on the severity levels of pedestrian injuries; and (3) explore the role of spatial correlation in econometric crash‐severity models. The data from 1889 pedestrian‐related crashes at 318 signalized intersections between 2008 and 2012 were elaborately collected from the Traffic Accident Database System maintained by the Hong Kong Transport Department. To account for the cross‐intersection heterogeneity, a Bayesian hierarchical logit model with uncorrelated and spatially correlated random effects was developed. An intrinsic conditional autoregressive prior was specified for the spatial correlation term. Results revealed that (1) signalized intersections with greater pedestrian volumes generally exhibited a lower injury risk; (2) ignoring the spatial correlation potentially results in reduced model goodness‐of‐fit, an underestimation of variability and standard error of parameter estimates, as well as inconsistent, biased, and erroneous inference; (3) special attention should be paid to the following factors, which led to a significantly higher probability of pedestrians being killed or sustaining severe injury: pedestrian age greater than 65 years, casualties with head injuries, crashes that occurred on footpaths that were not obstructed/overcrowded, heedless or inattentive crossing, crashes on the two‐way carriageway, and those that occurred near tram or light‐rail transit stops. Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".