MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4231284316 · doi:10.1177/0361198106197200111

Impact of Hourly Measured Speed on Accident Risk in the Netherlands

2006· article· en· W4231284316 on OpenAlexaff
Tom Brijs, Geert Wets, Robin Krimpenfort, Col Offermans

Bibliographic record

VenueTransportation Research Record Journal of the Transportation Research Board · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTraffic and Road Safety
Canadian institutionsMinistry of Transportation of Ontario
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTraffic speedCrashSpeed limitWork (physics)Poison controlTransport engineeringSpeed measurementVariation (astronomy)Environmental scienceStatisticsComputer scienceEngineeringAutomotive engineeringMathematicsEnvironmental healthMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Several scholars have defined the urgent need for more research to identify more fully the precise relationship between speed and crash involvement. This paper presents the first results of an exploratory study carried out in the Brabant Southeast police region in the Netherlands. Hourly speed measurement data over a period of 2 years were collected from loop detectors on the municipal and provincial road network and were related to crashes. Different aspects of traffic intensity, speed, and their impact on crashes, including absolute speed, speed variation, and the proportion of excessive speeders, for vehicles less than and more than 5.2 m long, were studied. The study also discusses a number of methodological aspects associated with this kind of analysis. The results show that although absolute speed plays a more important role on roads where speed limits are low, the variation in speed correlates more with crashes when speed limits are higher. Given the limited study area, the results of this work cannot be generalized without risk. However, they offer interesting insights that deserve further investigation in a nationwide cross-sectional study.

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)0.010
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 score0.113
Threshold uncertainty score0.224

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.300 · 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
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransportation Research Record Journal of the Transportation Research Board→Same topicTraffic and Road Safety→French-language works237,207→