Application of the Conway-MaxwellPoisson generalized linear model for analyzing motor vehicle crashes. Accident Analysis and Prevention
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper documents the application of the Conway-Maxwell-Poisson (COM-Poisson) generalized linear model (GLM) for modeling motor vehicle crashes. The COM-Poisson distribution, originally developed in 1962, has recently been re-introduced by statisticians for analyzing count data subjected to over- and under-dispersion. This innovative distribution is an extension of the Poisson distribution. The objectives of this study were to evaluate the application of the COM-Poisson GLM for analyzing motor vehicle crashes and compare the results with the traditional Negative Binomial (NB) model. The comparison analysis was carried out using the most common functional forms employed by transportation safety analysts, which link crashes to the entering flows at intersections or on segments. To accomplish the objectives of the study, several NB and COM-Poisson GLMs were developed and compared using two datasets. The first dataset contained crash data collected at signalized 4-legged intersections in Toronto, Ont. The second dataset included data collected for rural 4-lane divided and undivided highways in Texas. Several methods were used to assess the statistical fit and predictive performance of the
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 | 0.007 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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".