MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W52387335

The contribution of alcohol to work-related road crashes in New South Wales

2004· article· en· W52387335 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Narelle Haworth, Mark Symmons

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTraffic and Road Safety
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCrashTransport engineeringWork (physics)Quarter (Canadian coin)GeographyPoison controlOccupational safety and healthHuman factors and ergonomicsRoad trafficEngineeringEnvironmental healthComputer sciencePolitical scienceMedicine
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Work-related crashes account for 6 per cent of all road fatalities, rising to 7 per cent if commuting deaths are included. Illegal levels of alcohol (exceeding 0.05 per cent) are commonly found in about one-fifth to one-quarter of all drivers killed in road crashes in Australia. Yet little is known about the contribution of alcohol to work-related road crashes. The ability of crash data analyses to answer this question depends on being able to identify work-related driving and being able to identify the level of alcohol present. Both issues present problems. This paper reports completed analyses of a dataset produced by the New South Wales Roads and Traffic Authority that allows fleet-registered vehicles in crashes to be identified. The analyses examine the involvement of alcohol in these crashes and the potential influences of the temporal patterns of driving, vehicle characteristics and driver characteristics. (a) For the covering entry of this conference, please see ITRD abstract no. E211985.

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)0.005
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 score0.450
Threshold uncertainty score0.896

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.202
Teacher spread0.194 · 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

Citations2
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicTraffic and Road Safety→French-language works237,207→