MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7071940007

Teen Driver Safety : Review of the Literature on Driver Education Evaluation 2010 Update

2010· article· en· W7071940007 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueRosa P: A digital library for transportation research (United States Department of Transportation) · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTraffic and Road Safety
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrincipal (computer security)Public educationLicenseTraining (meteorology)Secondary educationHigher education
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In North America the term driver education has usually been applied to programs for beginning drivers consisting of both "theory" instruction in the classroom and practical training in a vehicle. Traditional programs have taken place in a single stage, before the driver becomes licensed. Indeed, one principal purpose of driver education is to prepare beginners for license testing. In many jurisdictions, but by no means all, most beginner drivers receive some instruction from a paid professional instructor (Maycock and Forsyth 1997). Driver education was widely available in public secondary schools in North America for many years. After the early 1980s, availability has declined in most jurisdictions. This was especially the case in the United States, where high school driver education had been pervasive through the 1970s. In Canada, driver education has always been more diverse. High school driver education has remained strong in some provinces, never existed in others, and has declined in still others in a manner similar to the United States.\n

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)0.021
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.058
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.111

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0210.058
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.002
Bibliometrics0.0140.013
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.258 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRosa P: A digital library for transportation research (United States Department of Transportation)Same topicTraffic and Road SafetyFrench-language works237,207