MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7057985759

Motor Vehicle Collisions in London, Ontario: Estimating the influence of the built environment and children’s potential exposure

2022· article· en· W7057985759 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueScholarship@Western (Western University) · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicMagnetic confinement fusion research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCollisionPedestrianKernel density estimationBuilt environmentLogistic regressionGuard (computer science)Poison controlEstimation
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Motor vehicle collisions are the leading cause of death for children and youth worldwide. To effectively target interventions to improve child safety, it is necessary to identify where motor vehicle collisions occur most often and what factors make these areas more hazardous. Study #1 maps collisions in London, Ontario (2010-2019) and identifies hotspots using a network kernel density estimation method within a GIS. Logistic regression analysis revealed that bike lanes were negatively associated with hotspots, while sidewalks were positively associated. Study #2 estimated children’s risk of being exposed to a motor vehicle collision while commuting to and from school, by combining collision risk data from study #1 with modelled student pedestrian volumes. Results suggest current crossing guard locations in London are not optimally deployed and should be relocated to the riskiest areas for student pedestrians. The findings of this thesis suggest that certain built environment characteristics have a significant influence on collision hotspots and should be considered in future road safety policy.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.102

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.228 · 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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScholarship@Western (Western University)→Same topicMagnetic confinement fusion research→French-language works237,207→