MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3082854818 · doi:10.1155/2020/7843743

Road Markings and Their Impact on Driver Behaviour and Road Safety: A Systematic Review of Current Findings

2020· review· en· W3082854818 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Advanced Transportation · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTraffic and Road Safety
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTransport engineeringRoad surfaceRoad trafficPlan (archaeology)Poison controlEngineeringGeographyCivil engineeringEnvironmental healthMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As part of the traffic control plan, road markings form the traffic surface and provide visual guidance for road users. Since their first application to the present day, road markings have become a common element of road infrastructure and one of the basic low-cost safety measures. The aim of this paper is to provide a systematic review of the most significant academic activities to date regarding the influence of longitudinal and transverse road markings as well as road markings for hazard locations (curves, intersections, and rural-urban transitions) on driver’s behaviour and overall road safety. The review includes a total of 71 studies from which are 52 peer-reviewed journal studies, 4 conference proceedings, and 15 professional reports. The studies are, based on their aim, divided into two categories: (1) studies on the impact of road markings on driver behaviour (36 studies) and (2) studies on the impact of road markings on road safety (35 studies).

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.362
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.268 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it