Active 'Do Not Block Tracks' Sign and Queue Detection System (Poster)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Where a traffic signal controlled intersection is located within close proximity to a railway crossing, traffic queues from the traffic signal may approach or extend past the railway crossing if traffic volumes are high. Vehicles queued across a railway crossing are at significant risk in that if a train approaches, vehicles ahead in the queue can block their ability to move forward to avoid a collision with a train. As such, queuing of vehicles across railway crossings is an important road safety matter. As per the draft Canadian Railway-Roadway Grade Crossing Standards, traffic signal pre-emption by a grade crossing warning system is required where there is 60 m or less between the stop line for the traffic signals and the nearest rail or where there is more than 60m between the stop line for the traffic signal and the nearest rail and the queue from the traffic signal is expected to regularly extend to within 5 m of the rail. Where traffic queues are very long (>100 m), pre-emption may not adequately clear traffic from the track and the need for additional anti-queuing measures should be considered. In 2010, following discussions with Transport Canada and Canadian National (CN), Manitoba Infrastructure and Transportation (MIT) developed and installed an active Do Not Block Tracks sign at an at-grade railway crossing where the queuing of traffic across the crossing area had been identified as a potential concern. For the covering abstract of this conference see ITRD record number 201310RT334E.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.084 | 0.043 |
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".