A Monte-Carlo simulation analysis for evaluating the severity distribution functions (SDFs) calibration methodology and determining the minimum sample-size requirements

Accident Analysis and Prevention

Volumn 98, Issue , 2017, Pages 303-311

  Shirazi, Mohammadali ^a   Reddy Geedipally, Srinivas ^b   Lord, Dominique ^a  

^a Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering   (United States)

^b TEXAS A AND M UNIVERSITY SYSTEM   (United States)

Author keywords

Calibration factor; Monte Carlo simulation; Sample size; Severity distribution function (SDF)

Indexed keywords

CALIBRATION; DISTRIBUTION FUNCTIONS; FUNCTION EVALUATION; HIGHWAY ACCIDENTS; HIGHWAY ENGINEERING; INTELLIGENT SYSTEMS;

CALIBRATION FACTORS; CALIBRATION METHODOLOGIES; CALIBRATION PROCESS; CALIBRATION SAMPLES; COEFFICIENT OF VARIATION; EXTENSIVE SIMULATIONS; SAMPLE SIZES; SEVERITY DISTRIBUTION FUNCTION (SDF);

MONTE CARLO METHODS;

CALIBRATION; CAR DRIVING; HUMAN; MONTE CARLO METHOD; PREVENTION AND CONTROL; RISK ASSESSMENT; SAFETY; SAMPLE SIZE; STATISTICAL MODEL; STATISTICS AND NUMERICAL DATA; THEORETICAL MODEL; TRAFFIC ACCIDENT;

ACCIDENTS, TRAFFIC; AUTOMOBILE DRIVING; CALIBRATION; HUMANS; MODELS, STATISTICAL; MODELS, THEORETICAL; MONTE CARLO METHOD; RISK ASSESSMENT; SAFETY; SAMPLE SIZE;

EID: 84994052033     PISSN: 00014575     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.aap.2016.10.004     Document Type: Article

References (9)

1. AASHTO, American association of state highways and transportation officials. Highway Safety Manual, 1st edition, 2010, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington D.C.
2. Alluri, P., Saha, D., Gan, A., Minimum sample sizes for estimating reliable highway safety manual (HSM) calibration factors. J. Transp. Saf. Secur. 8:1 (2016), 56–74.
3. Bahar, G., User's guide to develop highway safety manual safety performance function calibration factors. National Cooperative Highway Research Program, 2014, Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C.
4. Banihashemi, M., Sensitivity analysis of data set sizes for highway safety manual calibration factors. Transportation Research Record 2279: Journal of the Transortation Research Board, 2012, 75–81.
5. Bonneson, J.A., Geedipally, S.R., Pratt, M., Lord, D., Safety Prediction Methodology and Analysis Tool for Freeways and Interchanges. 2012, National Cooperative Highway Research (NCHRP), 17–45.
6. Lord, D., Geedipally, S.R., Shirazi, M., Improved Guidelines for Estimating the Highway Safety Manual Calibration Factors. 2016, Texas A&M Transportation Institute, College Station, TX ATLAS-2015-10.
7. Shirazi, M., Lord, D., Geedipally, S.R., Sample-size guidelines for recalibrating crash prediction models: recommendation for the highway safety manual. Accid. Anal. Prev. 93 (2016), 160–168.
8. Shirazi, M., Geedipally, S.R., Lord, D., A procedure to determine when safety performance functions should be recalibrated. J. Transp. Saf. Secur., 2017, 10.1080/19439962.2016.1240734 Forthcoming.
9. Ye, F., Lord, D., Comparing three commonly used crash severity models on sample size requirements: multinomial logit: ordered probit and mixed logit models. Anal. Methods Accid. Res. 1 (2014), 72–85.