MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4391540824 · doi:10.1139/cjce-2023-0258

How COVID-19 impacted the temporal and spatial distribution of collision hotspots

2024· article· en· W4391540824 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Faeze Momeni Rad, Karim El‐Basyouny

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTraffic and Road Safety
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCollisionShapefileCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)StatisticCensus tractHotspot (geology)GeographyComputer scienceCartographyTransport engineeringStatisticsCensusComputer securityMathematicsEnvironmental healthEngineeringAlgorithmGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This research examines the spatial and temporal shift in collision hotspots caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, considering different collision severities. The Getis-Ord statistic was utilized to create spatial models and generate map outputs for 2019 and 2020. Two distinct approaches were employed: using a census tract shapefile (provided) and creating fishnet polygons measuring 500 m by 500 m. Results showed fewer hotspots outside Edmonton's central core, while fatal collisions were concentrated close to the core. This intriguing finding suggests that COVID-19 restrictions led to more aggressive driving behaviour near the centre, contributing to a rise in fatal collision numbers. The study found a significant reduction in traffic collisions in April 2020, with a 58% decrease compared to the previous year. The research highlights the pandemic's impact on road safety, emphasizing the importance of reducing traffic volume and advocating for traffic restrictions and control strategies, multi-modal planning, and efficient pricing strategies within Vision Zero for improved road safety.

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)0.004
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 score0.189
Threshold uncertainty score0.377

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.190
Teacher spread0.183 · 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

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering→Same topicTraffic and Road Safety→French-language works237,207→