An Improved Deep Belief Network Model for Road Safety Analyses
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Crash prediction is a critical component of road safety analyses. A widely adopted approach to crash prediction is application of regression based techniques. The underlying calibration process is often time-consuming, requiring significant domain knowledge and expertise and cannot be easily automated. This paper introduces a new machine learning (ML) based approach as an alternative to the traditional techniques. The proposed ML model is called regularized deep belief network, which is a deep neural network with two training steps: it is first trained using an unsupervised learning algorithm and then fine-tuned by initializing a Bayesian neural network with the trained weights from the first step. The resulting model is expected to have improved prediction power and reduced need for the time-consuming human intervention. In this paper, we attempt to demonstrate the potential of this new model for crash prediction through two case studies including a collision data set from 800 km stretch of Highway 401 and other highways in Ontario, Canada. Our intention is to show the performance of this ML approach in comparison to various traditional models including negative binomial (NB) model, kernel regression (KR), and Bayesian neural network (Bayesian NN). We also attempt to address other related issues such as effect of training data size and training parameters.
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 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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".