Actual safety of the youngest road users at pedestrian crossings
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives The article analyses the impact of legal regulations increasing pedestrian rights at crossings (introduced in the amended Road Traffic Law on June 1, 2021) on the actual safety of the youngest road users at pedestrian crossings. In accordance with the law, the scope of the pedestrian protection in the area of pedestrian crossings was increased. It was happened mainly because of imposing additional obligations on the vehicle driver. Material and methods In our study we used the method of quantitative and qualitative analysis of the content contained in scientific publications, programs and reports, normative acts related to the thematic area and statistical data. Police statistical data for the last quarter of 2023 collected in the Accident and Collision Registration System (SEWIK in Polish) were of particular importance for us. Results It might seem that over time, drivers will get used to the new regulations, and pedestrians, the youngest ones, will enter into some kind of synergy with them. The presented data show that the number of children aged 7-16 involved in road accidents at pedestrian crossings has significantly increased. The number of injured children has also increased. Conclusions We proved that the changes to the road traffic law introduced on June 1, 2021 (increasing the scope of pedestrian protection in the pedestrian crossing area by imposing additional obligations on the vehicle driver) have not had the expected (positive) impact on the actual safety of the youngest road users using pedestrian crossings. At the same time, the opposite tendency was demonstrated, i.e. the changing safety of the youngest people at pedestrian crossings, unfortunately with a downward trend.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".