MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3184356259 · doi:10.1155/2021/5545117

SAVE-T: Safety Analysis Visualization and Evaluation Tool

2021· article· en· W3184356259 on OpenAlexfundvenueno aff
Yuan Zhu, Sami Demiroluk, Kaan Özbay, Kun Xie, Hong Yang, Di Sha

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Advanced Transportation · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicData Visualization and Analytics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersYoung Scientists FundNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaYork UniversityNatural Science Foundation for Young Scientists of Shanxi ProvinceNew Jersey Turfgrass AssociationNew York University
KeywordsVisualizationComputer scienceCrashVisual analyticsData visualizationAnalyticsData scienceTransport engineeringCreative visualizationData miningEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Traffic crashes are one of the biggest issues which constitute a threat to lives of the motorists and disrupt operations of the transportation system. To reduce the number of crashes and alleviate their impacts, it is necessary to scrutinize the factors contributing to the risk of traffic crashes. Lately, visual analytics tools become very popular for data exploration and obtaining insights from the data. In this paper, a new web-based data visualization tool called Safety Analysis Visualization and Evaluation Tool (SAVE-T) was introduced. This tool enables users to interactively create queries and visually explore the results. By utilizing an online crash database, it offers various innovative functionalities for analysis and visualization of the crash data such as custom query development module and a subway-like map for easily visualizing the accident on the roadway segments. This tool provides an effective and efficient way to transportation agencies and professionals for traffic safety analyses and visualizations.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.829
Threshold uncertainty score0.304

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.312 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Advanced TransportationSame topicData Visualization and AnalyticsFrench-language works237,207