System reliability as a surrogate measure of safety for horizontal curves: methodology and case studies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Reliability analysis has been advocated to account for the uncertainty in geometric design and to evaluate the risk associated with various design options. Most of the previous studies using reliability-analysis in highway design evaluated only one-mode of noncompliance. This study assesses the performance of horizontal curves using a system of multi-modal noncompliance (insufficient sight distance, vehicle skidding, and vehicle rollover). Five case studies of a highway in British Columbia are considered. Two approaches were used: (1) second-order reliability-bounds with FORM analysis (First-Order Reliability Method), (2) Monte-Carlo Simulation (MCS). A calibrated design chart that accommodates heavy-trucks on horizontal-curves with sharp-radii is provided. The results show that the differences in the system probability of noncompliance between one-mode and system of multi-modes of noncompliance are more pronounced for heavy-trucks. Results also show that the probability of noncompliance associated with vehicle rollover is significantly affected by the stability-ratio compared to height-ratio and roll-rate.
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 | 0.007 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".