Investigation into Interactions between Accident Consequences and Traffic Signs: A Bayesian Bivariate Tobit Quantile Regression Approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study intended to investigate the interactions between accident severity levels and traffic signs in state roads located in Croatia and explore the correlation between accident severity levels and heterogeneity attributed to unobserved factors. The data from 460 state roads between 2012 and 2016 were collected from Traffic Accident Database System maintained by the Republic of Croatia Ministry of the Interior. To address the correlation and heterogeneity, Bayesian bivariate Tobit quantile regression models were proposed, in which the bivariate framework addressed the correlation of residuals with Bayesian approach, while the Tobit quantile regression model accommodated the heterogeneity due to unobserved factors. By comparing the Bayesian bivariate Tobit quantile and mean regression models, the proposed quantile models showed priority to mean model. Results revealed that (1) low visibility and the number of invalid traffic signs per km increased the accident rate of material damage, death, or injury; (2) average speed limit exhibited a close relation with accident rate; and (3) the number of mandatory signs was more likely to reduce the accident rate of material damage, while the number of warning signs was significant for accident rate of death or injury.
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 | 0.016 | 0.034 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".