Abstract
Two different methods for addressing the regression to the mean phenomenon (RTM) were evaluated using empirical data: 1 The Empirical Bayes (EB) method, which combines observed collision data and Safety Performance Functions (SPF) to estimate expected collision frequency of a site.2 Continuous Risk Profile (CRP), which estimates true collision profile constructed after filtering out the noise.Data from 110 miles of freeway located in California were used to evaluate the performance of the EB and CRP methods in addressing RTM. CRP outperformed the EB method in estimating collision frequencies in selected high collision concentration locations (HCCLs). Findings indicate that the performance of the EB method can be markedly affected when SPF is biased, while the performance of CRP remains much less affected. The CRP method was more effective in addressing RTM.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 49-56 |
| Number of pages | 8 |
| Journal | Accident Analysis and Prevention |
| Volume | 97 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 2016 Dec 1 |
Fingerprint
Keywords
- Continuous risk profile
- Empirical bayes method
- Random noise
- Safety performance function
- The regression to the mean
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Human Factors and Ergonomics
- Safety, Risk, Reliability and Quality
- Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health
- Law
Cite this
Evaluating and addressing the effects of regression to the mean phenomenon in estimating collision frequencies on urban high collision concentration locations. / Lee, Jinwoo; Chung, Koohong; Kang, Seungmo.
In: Accident Analysis and Prevention, Vol. 97, 01.12.2016, p. 49-56.Research output: Contribution to journal › Article
}
TY - JOUR
T1 - Evaluating and addressing the effects of regression to the mean phenomenon in estimating collision frequencies on urban high collision concentration locations
AU - Lee, Jinwoo
AU - Chung, Koohong
AU - Kang, Seungmo
PY - 2016/12/1
Y1 - 2016/12/1
N2 - Two different methods for addressing the regression to the mean phenomenon (RTM) were evaluated using empirical data: 1 The Empirical Bayes (EB) method, which combines observed collision data and Safety Performance Functions (SPF) to estimate expected collision frequency of a site.2 Continuous Risk Profile (CRP), which estimates true collision profile constructed after filtering out the noise.Data from 110 miles of freeway located in California were used to evaluate the performance of the EB and CRP methods in addressing RTM. CRP outperformed the EB method in estimating collision frequencies in selected high collision concentration locations (HCCLs). Findings indicate that the performance of the EB method can be markedly affected when SPF is biased, while the performance of CRP remains much less affected. The CRP method was more effective in addressing RTM.
AB - Two different methods for addressing the regression to the mean phenomenon (RTM) were evaluated using empirical data: 1 The Empirical Bayes (EB) method, which combines observed collision data and Safety Performance Functions (SPF) to estimate expected collision frequency of a site.2 Continuous Risk Profile (CRP), which estimates true collision profile constructed after filtering out the noise.Data from 110 miles of freeway located in California were used to evaluate the performance of the EB and CRP methods in addressing RTM. CRP outperformed the EB method in estimating collision frequencies in selected high collision concentration locations (HCCLs). Findings indicate that the performance of the EB method can be markedly affected when SPF is biased, while the performance of CRP remains much less affected. The CRP method was more effective in addressing RTM.
KW - Continuous risk profile
KW - Empirical bayes method
KW - Random noise
KW - Safety performance function
KW - The regression to the mean
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84983462293&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84983462293&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.aap.2016.08.019
DO - 10.1016/j.aap.2016.08.019
M3 - Article
C2 - 27566957
AN - SCOPUS:84983462293
VL - 97
SP - 49
EP - 56
JO - Accident Analysis and Prevention
JF - Accident Analysis and Prevention
SN - 0001-4575
ER -