MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7097948341

PAPER TRB03-3410 Synthesis on the Safety of Right Turn on Red

2002· article· en· W7097948341 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTraffic and Road Safety
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGovernment (linguistics)CommissionCrashMinistry of TransportOrder (exchange)Christian ministry
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Government of Quebec is currently considering the introduction of right turn on red (RTOR) at signalized intersections in Quebec, with the possible exception of the City of Montreal. The Province of Quebec and New York City are the only jurisdictions in North America where the RTOR is not permitted. Following more than 25 years of intense political debates, the Government agreed in 2000 to commission a policy study, aimed at either adopting or rejecting the RTOR once and for all. In order to fully understand all the issues surrounding the introduction of such a measure, the Ministry of Transportation of Quebec (MTQ) mandated the author of this paper to perform a study on the safety, traffic operational improvements, and other characteristics resulting from RTOR based on information gathered from various agencies in the United States and Canada. The study aimed at collecting crash statistics; gathering and reviewing recent research documents and papers; and surveying the opinions of transportation experts and researchers on this topic. The outcome of this study shows that the RTOR is not a dangerous maneuver at signalized intersections for either vehicles or pedestrians in most

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.820
Threshold uncertainty score0.361

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0040.003
Scholarly communication0.0080.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0040.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0950.008

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.163
Teacher spread0.153 · 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
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicTraffic and Road Safety→French-language works237,207→