首页> 外文期刊>Journal of Advanced Transportation >Comparative Analysis of the Reported Animal-Vehicle Collisions Data and Carcass Removal Data for Hotspot Identification
【24h】

Comparative Analysis of the Reported Animal-Vehicle Collisions Data and Carcass Removal Data for Hotspot Identification

机译:报告的动物 - 车辆碰撞数据和胴体去除数据的比较分析

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Two common types of animal-vehicle collision data (reported animal-vehicle collision (AVC) data and carcass removal data) are usually recorded by transportation management agencies. Previous studies have found that these two datasets often demonstrate different characteristics. To accurately identify the higher-risk animal-vehicle collision sites, this study compared the differences in hotspot identification and the effect of explanation variables between carcass removal and reported AVCs. To complete the objective, both the Negative Binomial (NB) model and the generalized Negative Binomial (GNB) are applied in calculating the Empirical Bayesian (EB) estimates using the animal collision data collected on ten highways in Washington State. The important findings can be summarized as follows. (1) The explanatory variables have different effects on the occurrence of carcass removal data and reported AVC data. (2) The ranking results from EB estimates when using carcass removal data and reported AVC data differ significantly. (3) The results of hotspot identification are different between carcass removal data and reported AVC data. However, the ranking results of GNB models are better than those of NB models in terms of consistency. Thus, transportation management agencies should be cautious when using either carcass removal data or reported AVC data to identify hotspots.
机译:两种常见类型的动物 - 车辆碰撞数据(报告的动物 - 车辆碰撞(AVC)数据和胴体移除数据)通常由运输管理机构记录。以前的研究发现,这两个数据集经常表现出不同的特征。为了准确识别高风险的动物 - 车辆碰撞网站,该研究比较了热点鉴定的差异和胴体移除和报告的AVC之间的解释变量的效果。为了完成目标,使用在华盛顿州的十路上收集的动物碰撞数据计算经验贝叶斯(EB)估计,应用负二项式(NB)模型和广义负二项式(GNB)。重要的发现可以概括如下。 (1)解释性变量对胴体去除数据的发生和报告的AVC数据具有不同的影响。 (2)使用胴体移除数据并报告AVC数据显着不同时EB估计的排名结果。 (3)热点识别结果在胴体移除数据和报告的AVC数据之间存在不同。然而,在一致性方面,GNB模型的排名结果优于NB模型。因此,当使用胴体删除数据或报告的AVC数据来识别热点时,运输管理机构应该是谨慎的。

著录项

  • 来源
    《Journal of Advanced Transportation》 |2019年第2期|3521793.1-3521793.13|共13页
  • 作者单位

    Tongji Univ Minist Educ Key Lab Rd & Traff Engn Shanghai 201804 Peoples R China;

    Tongji Univ Minist Educ Key Lab Rd & Traff Engn Shanghai 201804 Peoples R China;

    Texas A&M Transportat Inst College Stn TX 77843 USA;

    Tongji Univ Minist Educ Key Lab Rd & Traff Engn Shanghai 201804 Peoples R China;

    Univ Washington Dept Civil & Environm Engn Washington More Hall 133B Seattle WA 98195 USA;

    Tongji Univ Minist Educ Key Lab Rd & Traff Engn Shanghai 201804 Peoples R China;

    Tongji Univ Minist Educ Key Lab Rd & Traff Engn Shanghai 201804 Peoples R China;

  • 收录信息 美国《科学引文索引》(SCI);美国《工程索引》(EI);
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号