MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3094538822 · doi:10.13140/rg.2.2.35924.63365

Examination of the Traffic Safety Environment During the Second Quarter Of 2020 Special Report

2020· article· en· W3094538822 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Essie Wagner, Randolph Atkins, Amy Berning, Arryn Robbins, Christine Watson, Jonlee Anderle

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTraffic Prediction and Management Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuarter (Canadian coin)Computer scienceHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration is reviewing national changes in roadway travel and changes in drivers’ behavior that have occurred since the start of the COVID-19 public health emergency, with an emphasis on the second quarter (Q2) of 2020. Most important, we are learning about the impact on motor ve-hicle crashes and fatalities. This report draws from an array of sources to bring together as much information as possible to provide an understanding of our current traffic safety environment, and to better address our chang-ing traffic safety needs. Prior economic downturns, such as the financial crisis of 2008, provide some compari-son for reduced roadway travel and changes in travel patterns. As this report documents, although there are some similarities with that time frame, there are many differences in impact on speeding and other dangerous driving behaviors, such as reduced seat belt use. This report explores changes in countermeasure use including traffic enforcement and public communications and outreach. This report also examines the question of whether some people – who continued driving even when many communities had stay-at-home guidelines – may be inherently higher-risk drivers. The report draws on sources such as emergency medical services (EMS) and hospital trauma center data as we examine this issue.

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 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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.489
Threshold uncertainty score0.705

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.160
Teacher spread0.156 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations21
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicTraffic Prediction and Management TechniquesFrench-language works237,207