MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4291178027 · doi:10.1177/03611981221115720

Method for Estimating the Monetary Benefit of Improving Annual Average Daily Traffic Accuracy in the Context of Road Safety Network Screening

2022· article· en· W4291178027 on OpenAlexaff
Mohammad Zarei, Bruce Hellinga

Bibliographic record

VenueTransportation Research Record Journal of the Transportation Research Board · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTraffic and Road Safety
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCrashContext (archaeology)StatisticsComputer scienceTransport engineeringPoison controlSample (material)Dispersion (optics)Vehicle miles of travelMathematicsEngineeringGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Conventional road safety network screening (NS) relies on measures of historical crash data and annual average daily traffic (AADT) as a measure of exposure to develop safety performance functions. AADT is typically estimated from short-term counts and contains error which can negatively affect NS outcomes and result in the inefficient allocation of safety improvement resources. In this paper, we propose a simulation-based method for quantifying the monetary benefit of improving AADT accuracy. The results of applying the method under various conditions show that crash data sets with higher sample mean and dispersion parameter values are more sensitive to AADT error and consequently benefit more from improving AADT accuracy. The use of the proposed method is illustrated through the application to a real-world example.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.058
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.051

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.058
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.293 · 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 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

Citations4
Published2022
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→