MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W611857932 · doi:10.1016/j.jtte.2017.10.001

Investigating the influence of segmentation in estimating safety performance functions for roadway sections

2018· article· en· W611857932 on OpenAlexafffund
Salvatore Cafiso, Carmelo D’Agostino, Bhagwant Persaud

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Traffic and Transportation Engineering (English Edition) · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTraffic and Road Safety
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsSegmentationComputer scienceIdentification (biology)Homogeneity (statistics)TangentTransport engineeringData miningEngineeringArtificial intelligenceMachine learningMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Safety performance functions (SPFs) are crucial to science-based road safety management. Success in developing and applying SPFs, apart data quality and availability, depends fundamentally on two key factors: the validity of the statistical inferences for the available data and on how well the data can be organized into distinct homogeneous entities. The latter aspect plays a key role in the identification and treatment of road sections or corridors with problems related to safety. Indeed, the segmentation of a road network could be especially critical in the development of SPFs that could be used in safety management for roadway types, such as motorways (freeways in North America), which have a large number of variables that could result in very short segments if these are desired to be homogeneous. This consequence, from an analytical point of view, can be a problem when the location of crashes is not precise and when there is an overabundance of segments with zero crashes. Lengthening the segments for developing and applying SPFs can mitigate this problem, but at a sacrifice of homogeneity. This paper seeks to address this dilemma by investigating four approaches for segmentation for motorways, using sample data from Italy. The best results were obtained for the segmentation based on two curves and two tangents within a segment and with fixed length segments. The segmentation characterized by a constant value of all original variables inside each segment was the poorest approach by all measures.

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 score0.372
Threshold uncertainty score0.396

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 communication0.0000.001
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 head0.195
Teacher spread0.189 · 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

Citations19
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Traffic and Transportation Engineering (English Edition)Same topicTraffic and Road SafetyFrench-language works237,207