Modeling Collision Probability on Freeway: Accounting for Different Types and Severities in Various LOS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this study, collision-related data were collected on the I-880 freeway of California in the United States from 2006 to 2011. Our objective was to study the collision probability of different collision types and severities in different traffic states. The traffic states were divided by the traditional level of service (LOS) method. Various Bayesian conditional logit models have been established to analyze the relationship between the collision probability of different collision patterns and LOSs. The results showed that LOS A had the best safety performance associated with all of the collision types and severities, LOS C had the worst safety performance associated with hit object collisions, LOS D had the worst safety performance associated with sideswipe collisions and rear end collisions, and LOS F had the worst safety performance associated with injury collisions. The five-stage Bayesian random parameter sequential logit model was established to quantify the effects of different variables on the collision probability of various collision types and severities. In addition to LOS, the visibility, road surface, weather, ramp, and number of lanes had significant effects on different collision types and severities.
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 | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".