MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4376955668 · doi:10.33492/jrs-d-22-00022

Embedding Safe System in Victoria: Blockers, Enablers and Improvement Roadmap

2023· article· en· W4376955668 on OpenAlexaff
H Alavi, Chris Jones, Carly Hunter

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Road Safety · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTraffic and Road Safety
Canadian institutionsTransport Canada
FundersTransport Accident Commission
KeywordsRoad mapAction planPlan (archaeology)CornerstoneAction (physics)Process managementKey (lock)Patient safetyManagement systemBusinessOperations managementTransport engineeringRisk analysis (engineering)Engineering managementEngineeringComputer scienceComputer securityManagementPolitical scienceHealth care

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Safe System approach was adopted in Victoria in 2004. It has since been the cornerstone of every road safety strategy and action plan, most recently the Victoria Road Safety Strategy 2021-2030. Despite the absence of extensive and conclusive evidence, it is apparent that the limited integration of the Safe System approach into our road and transport management system has hindered its capacity to significantly reduce serious road trauma. In this project, five workshops were delivered by HA Consulting and Road Safety Victoria (RSV) to diagnose what implementation blockers exist and how road safety management systems and stakeholders could be enabled to implement the Safe System approach. Over 60 representatives attended the workshops from key road safety stakeholders and players. The anonymous workshop exercises identified a high personal alignment to the Safe System principles, a range of systemic practical day-to-day blockers, and suggestions for what could enable better Safe System aligned decision making. An improvement roadmap of concept-level projects was developed to address Safe System implementation blockers and implement the identified enabling measures.

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)0.035
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.022
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.077
Threshold uncertainty score0.185

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0350.022
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0050.004
Scholarly communication0.0110.008
Open science0.0030.011
Research integrity0.0030.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.202 · 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 designQualitative
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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Road Safety→Same topicTraffic and Road Safety→French-language works237,207→