MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3109734188 · doi:10.1139/cjce-2018-0785

Statistics and prediction of vehicle–bridge collisions in Quebec

2020· article· en· W3109734188 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Edouard Berton, Najib Bouaanani, Charles‐Philippe Lamarche, Nathalie Roy

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTraffic and Road Safety
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique MontréalMinistère des TransportsUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBridge (graph theory)Speed limitGeoreferenceTransport engineeringRoad surfaceComputer scienceDatabaseEngineeringGeographyCivil engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Vehicle–bridge collisions (VBCs) can compromise the safety of road users and cause major economic losses. This paper proposes and applies a methodology to investigate such events in Quebec. Relevant data have been collected from various sources and merged to provide a comprehensive database of VBCs that occurred in Quebec between 2000 and 2016. The developed database was used to carry out statistical analyses highlighting the main factors characterizing VBCs, such as vehicle’s body type, bridge dimensions, prescribed speed limit, road configuration, road surface condition and lighting. The compiled database was georeferenced in an upgradable map that can be used efficiently to visualize the distribution and evolution of VBCs over a given region of Quebec. A VBC regression model was also developed based on k-fold cross-validation. The proposed model can be updated regularly as new VBCs are reported and then used to identify bridges most likely to be affected by VBCs or prioritize actions to reduce the potential consequences.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.066

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.169
Teacher spread0.160 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations4
Published2020
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering→Same topicTraffic and Road Safety→French-language works237,207→