Investigating the Differences of Single-Vehicle and Multivehicle Accident Probability Using Mixed Logit Model
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Road traffic accidents are believed to be associated with not only road geometric feature and traffic characteristic, but also weather condition. To address these safety issues, it is of paramount importance to understand how these factors affect the occurrences of the crashes. Existing studies have suggested that the mechanisms of single-vehicle (SV) accidents and multivehicle (MV) accidents can be very different. Few studies were conducted to examine the difference of SV and MV accident probability by addressing unobserved heterogeneity at the same time. To investigate the different contributing factors on SV and MV, a mixed logit model is employed using disaggregated data with the response variable categorized as no accidents, SV accidents, and MV accidents. The results indicate that, in addition to speed gap, length of segment, and wet road surfaces which are significant for both SV and MV accidents, most of other variables are significant only for MV accidents. Traffic, road, and surface characteristics are main influence factors of SV and MV accident possibility. Hourly traffic volume, inside shoulder width, and wet road surface are found to produce statistically significant random parameters. Their effects on the possibility of SV and MV accident vary across different road segments.
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 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 it