MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403747931 · doi:10.5592/co/cetra.2024.1664

Analysis of crash severity at intersections and roundabouts using ordered and generalized ordered probit models

2024· article· en· W4403747931 on OpenAlexaff
Roya Kamali, Arash Mazaheri, Amir Rahimi

Bibliographic record

VenueRoad and rail infrastructure · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTraffic and Road Safety
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOrdered probitCrashProbitProbit modelEconometricsComputer scienceMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Accidents are considered as one of the leading causes of death around the world. Investigating the causes of various accidents, identifying the primary factors and accident blackspots can be used to prevent severe injuries and the associated costs and casualties. Many studies are conducted around the world to investigate the impacts of accidents and to identify the main factors. This study investigates the accidents and the severity of their injuries at intersections and squares. Accident data related to Zanjan is used to assess the severity of accidents at urban squares and intersections, which are modeled by SAS software. For this purpose, two models of OP and cumulative Probit are used. The results show that the cumulative probit model is better able to interpret the dependent variable based on the independent variables than the OP model. Based on the overall results of the models, it can be seen that the occurrence of an accident in daytime compared to nighttime, on holidays compared to non-holidays and in winter compared to other seasons, reduces the injury severity. Heavy vehicles reduce the injury severity compared to cars, while two-wheeled vehicles, including motorcycles and bicycles, increase the injury severity. Accidents at intersections also increase injury severity.

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 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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.043
Threshold uncertainty score0.650

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 head0.221
Teacher spread0.213 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRoad and rail infrastructureSame topicTraffic and Road SafetyFrench-language works237,207