Development of a Traffic Safety Action Plan for a Small Municipality: Case Study for the City of Saskatoon
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many jurisdictions have developed a high-level traffic safety policy document, such as the American “Strategic Highway Safety Plan” (SHSP) or the Canadian “Traffic Safety Action Plan” (TSAP). A SHSP and TSAP are both a scientific, data-driven, four to five year comprehensive safety document that is designed to identify a jurisdiction’s areas of safety concern known as “emphasis areas” and establish target safety goals (i.e., collision reduction goal(s)) for each chosen emphasis area. However, a TSAP includes additional information, such as network screening results and general safety strategies/programs for each chosen emphasis area. This study discusses the development of a TSAP for a small municipality through a case study for the City of Saskatoon. Many studies investigate selection of emphasis areas and target safety goals for the development of a SHSP, however, there are very few or limited studies that have discussed the approaches specifically for the development of a TSAP for a small municipality. This study used the most recent ten years (2001-2010) of collision data in the City of Saskatoon, Saskatchewan. The study provides knowledge for those who wish to develop a TSAP by describing the process and highlighting the challenges in developing a TSAP for a small municipality.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.011 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".