MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3158902797

Power computations in time series analyses for traffic safety interventions

2008· article· en· W3158902797 on OpenAlexaff
A. Ian McLeod, Evelyn Vingilis

Bibliographic record

VenueCentre for Accident Research & Road Safety - Qld (CARRS-Q); Faculty of Health; Institute of Health and Biomedical Innovation · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicInfrastructure Resilience and Vulnerability Analysis
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIntervention (counseling)Time seriesComputer scienceData collectionSeries (stratigraphy)Psychological interventionSample (material)Variety (cybernetics)Transport engineeringInterrupted Time Series AnalysisPoison controlRisk analysis (engineering)Operations researchEngineeringStatisticsBusinessMachine learningMedical emergencyMathematicsMedicineArtificial intelligence
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The evaluation of traffic safety interventions or other policies that can affect road safety often requires the collection of administrative time series data, such as monthly motor vehicle collision data that may be difficult and/or expensive to collect. Furthermore, since policy decisions may be based on the results found from the intervention analysis of the policy, it is important to ensure that the statistical tests have enough power, that is, that we have collected enough time series data both before and after the intervention so that a meaningful change in the series will likely be detected. In this short paper, we present a simple methodology for doing this. It is expected that the methodology presented will be useful for sample size determination in a wide variety of traffic safety intervention analysis applications. Our method is illustrated with a proposed traffic safety study that was fund by NIH.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.735
Threshold uncertainty score0.847

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.107
GPT teacher head0.428
Teacher spread0.322 · 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 designOther design
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

Citations0
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCentre for Accident Research & Road Safety - Qld (CARRS-Q); Faculty of Health; Institute of Health and Biomedical InnovationSame topicInfrastructure Resilience and Vulnerability AnalysisFrench-language works237,207