A New GNB Model of Crash Frequency for Freeway Sharp Horizontal Curve Based on Interactive Influence of Explanatory Variables
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Crash prediction of the sharp horizontal curve segment of freeway is a key method in analyzing safety situation of freeway horizontal alignment. The target of this paper is to improve predicting accuracy after considering the elastic influence of explanatory variables and interaction of explanatory variables on crash rate prediction. In the paper, flexibility and elasticity are defined to express the elastic influence of explanatory variables and interaction of explanatory variables on crash rate prediction. Thus, we proposed 6 types of models to predict crash frequency. These 6 types of models include 2 NB models (models 1 and 2), 2 GNB models (models 3 and 4), one NB model (model 5), and one GNB model (model 6) with flexibility and variable elasticity considered. The alignment and crash report data of 88 sharp horizontal curve segments from different institutions were surveyed to build the crash models. Traffic volume, highway horizontal radius, and curve length have been assigned as explanatory variables. Subsequently, statistical analysis is performed to determine the model parameters and conducted sensitivity analysis by AIC, BIC, and Pseudo R2. The results demonstrated the effective use of flexibility and elasticity in analyzing explanatory variables and in predicting freeway sharp horizontal curve segments. In six models, the result of model 6 is much better than those of the other models by fitting rules. We also compared the actual results from crashes of 88 sharp horizontal curve segments with those predicted by models 1, 3, and 6. Results demonstrate that model 6 is much more reasonable than the others.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.002 |
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".