Residents’ Perceptions on Road Hump Effectiveness in Malaysian Residential Environments
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Two common concerns for residents in their respective residential areas are high traffic speeds and noise levels.This paper analyses the perception of residents on the effectiveness of road humps in improving residential living environment based on their effects on traffic speed and noise.The study was conducted in three Malaysian residential areas, specifically Putrajaya, Taman Setiawangsa, and Keramat.A questionnaire survey was distributed to 478 respondents asking for their perceptions on whether road humps have improved their living environment by reducing speed and noise.Binary logistic regression models were also developed to identify variables that affect respondents' likelihood to agree that existing road humps have improved the living environment of the residents by reducing traffic speed and noise.The result of this study is that the height of road humps affects noise levels and traffic speeds, as average vehicle speeds and LAeq were lowest at the road hump of 90mm height.The respondents' perceptions of the importance of lower traffic speeds and noise levels, as well as the appropriateness of hump heights and locations, were significant variables in determining the likelihood of their agreement that road humps have improved their living environment.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".