MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2735644255 · doi:10.1080/17457300.2017.1341935

Intervention analysis of the safety effects of a legislation targeting excessive speeding in Canada

2017· article· en· W2735644255 on OpenAlexaffabout
Suliman Gargoum, Karim El‐Basyouny

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Injury Control and Safety Promotion · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTraffic and Road Safety
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLegislationLegislatureLicensePoison controlIntervention (counseling)Transport engineeringOccupational safety and healthCollisionEnforcementEngineeringEnvironmental healthSanctionsLaw enforcementInjury preventionHuman factors and ergonomicsComputer securityMedicineLawComputer sciencePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Excessive speeding is a major traffic safety concern consequently, numerous countermeasures have been considered to mitigate this problem. Excessive speeding, street racing and stunt driving activities subject all road users to extreme risk. To address this problem, three Canadian provinces introduced severe sanctions against drivers who exceed speed limits by high margins. Under the laws offenders were subject to immediate license suspension and vehicle impoundment. In this paper, intervention analysis of the collision data from the three provinces was conducted to identify the safety effects of the legislation. The analysis aims to identify changes in the time series behaviour of collision data after the adoption of the law. The changes were assessed for statistical significance, and the magnitude of the change was quantified. In general, the paper showed that the legislative changes were associated with drops in province-wide fatal collisions substantiating the safety benefits of introducing such legislation against excessive speeders.

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 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)0.000
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 score0.400
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations5
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Injury Control and Safety PromotionSame topicTraffic and Road SafetyFrench-language works237,207