MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391176798 · doi:10.4236/jtts.2024.141006

A Workable Solution for Reducing the Large Number of Vehicle and Pedestrian Accidents Occurring on a Yellow Light

2024· article· en· W4391176798 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Transportation Technologies · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTraffic and Road Safety
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPedestrianTransport engineeringEngineeringEnvironmental science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Traffic intersections are incredibly dangerous for drivers and pedestrians. Statistics from both Canada and the U.S. show a high number of fatalities and serious injuries related to crashes at intersections. In Canada, during 2019, the National Collision Database shows that 28% of traffic fatalities and 42% of serious injuries occurred at intersections. Likewise, the U.S. National Highway Traffic Administration (NHTSA) found that about 40% of the estimated 5,811,000 accidents in the U.S. during the year studied were intersection-related crashes. In fact, a major survey by the car insurance industry found that nearly 85% of drivers could not identify the correct action to take when approaching a yellow traffic light at an intersection. One major reason for these accidents is the “yellow light dilemma,” the ambiguous situation where a driver should stop or proceed forward when unexpectedly faced with a yellow light. This situation is even further exacerbated by the tendency of aggressive drivers to inappropriately speed up on the yellow just to get through the traffic light. A survey of Canadian drivers conducted by the Traffic Injury Research Foundation found that 9% of drivers admitted to speeding up to get through a traffic light. Another reason for these accidents is the increased danger of making a left-hand turn on yellow. According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Association (NHTSA), left turns occur in approximately 22.2% of collisions—as opposed to just 1.2% for right turns. Moreover, a study by CNN found left turns are three times as likely to kill pedestrians than right turns. The reason left turns are so much more likely to cause an accident is because they take a driver against traffic and in the path of oncoming cars. Additionally, most of these left turns occur at the driver’s discretion—as opposed to the distressingly brief left-hand arrow at busy intersections. Drive Safe Now proposes a workable solution for reducing the number of accidents occurring during a yellow light at intersections. We believe this fairly simple solution will save lives, prevent injuries, reduce damage to public and private property, and decrease insurance costs.

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.

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)0.000
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.685
Threshold uncertainty score0.194

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.239 · 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