Bibliographic record
Abstract
Safety belt use among African Americans rose to 77%, a sizable 8-point gain over their use two years ago. More than a quarter of Blacks who were not using belts in 2000 used them in 2002. These results are from the National Occupant Protection Use Survey (NOPUS), which is the only probability-based observational survey of safety belt use in the United States. The survey also found: The belt gender gap appears to be narrowing. Males registered a 5-point gain, which reduced the gap from 10 to 7 points. Males now use belts 72 % of the time, while females use 79 % of the time. Belt use has increased dramatically among older children, with 82 % of 8-15 year-olds now using belts. Belt use has increased in rural areas. NOPUS is conducted periodically by the National Center for Statistics and Analysis (NCSA) in the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). The data in this note were collected between June 3, 2002 and June 22, 2002, during which approximately 38,000 drivers and 12,000 passengers were observed at 1,141 randomly selected road sites. This note supplements the 2002 NOPUS data reported in [N], which contains results on belt use by such characteristics as time of day and type of belt enforcement law.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.032 | 0.023 |
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".