MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409694798 · doi:10.1080/13588265.2025.2492990

Lateral placement distribution of vehicles at horizontal curves on two-way undivided roads

2025· article· en· W4409694798 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Crashworthiness · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTraffic control and management
Canadian institutionsConestoga College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDistribution (mathematics)Transport engineeringComputer scienceEngineeringAutomotive engineeringEnvironmental scienceMathematicsMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The majority of road crashes occur at horizontal curves due to the inability of drivers to keep their vehicles at the right lateral position across the carriageway width. The lateral placement profile, which is a good indicator of crash potential at a horizontal curve, is further governed by the subject vehicle category, road geometry, and lane type. With the change of the aforementioned variables, the lateral placement of vehicles fluctuates widely across the carriageway of the horizontal curves. On this background, the present study forwards an approach to collect the lateral placement data at horizontal curves, investigates its characteristics using the fitted distribution models, and examines the influence of subject vehicle category, lane type, and curve radius on the lateral placement. The outcomes of this study explain the driving behaviours of different vehicles while manoeuvring at the horizontal curve, which is considered important prerequisite information for assessing traffic safety at horizontal curves.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.824
Threshold uncertainty score0.403

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.236 · 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