A Comparative Study of Alternative Model Structures and Criteria for Ranking Locations for Safety Improvements
In transportation safety literature, many statistical models and criteria have been proposed for quantifying risk at transportation facilities such as roadway intersections and highway–rail grade crossings, and identifying candidate locations, or blackspots, for engineering improvements. There are, however, few systematic studies on the comparative performance and practical implications of these models and criteria. The primary goal of this study is to investigate the relative impacts that the use of various alternative models and ranking criteria can have on identifying blackspots. Three alternative models are considered in this investigation, including the popular negative binomial model (NB), the heterogeneous negative binomial model (HNB), and the zero inflated negative binomial model (ZINB). The expected accident frequency based on both marginal distribution and posterior distribution is considered as a ranking criterion. A sample of highway–railway grade crossings located in the Canadian railway network is used in this investigation as an application environment. Copyright Springer Science + Business Media, LLC 2006
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:kap:netspa:v:6:y:2006:i:2:p:97-110. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Guenther Eichhorn)or (Christopher F. Baum)
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.