Development and Evaluation of Geostatistical Methods for Estimating Weather Related Collisions: A Large-Scale Case Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Winter driving conditions pose a real hazard to road users with increased chance of collisions during inclement weather events. As such, road authorities strive to service the hazardous roads or collision hot spots by increasing road safety, mobility, and accessibility. One measure of a hot spot would be winter collision statistics. Using the ratio of winter collisions (WC) to all collisions, roads that show a high ratio of WC should be given a high priority for further diagnosis and countermeasure selection. This study presents a unique methodological framework that is built on one of the least explored yet most powerful geostatistical techniques, namely, regression kriging (RK). Unlike other variants of kriging, RK uses auxiliary variables to gain a deeper understanding of contributing factors while also utilizing the spatial autocorrelation structure for predicting WC ratios. The applicability and validity of RK for a large-scale hot spot analysis is evaluated using the northeast quarter of the State of Iowa, spanning five winter seasons from 2013/14 to 2017/18. The findings of the case study assessed via three different statistical measures (mean squared error, root mean square error, and root mean squared standardized error) suggest that RK is very effective for modeling WC ratios, thereby further supporting its robustness and feasibility for a statewide implementation.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.017 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".