Skip to content
#software testing Open access

Time-aware crash-severity modelling: STATS19 and CAS

Sep 2026 · Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)

Abstract

v1.3.0: Corrected analysis and verified clean reconstruction Release date: 2026-09-07 This version supplies the corrected computational scope for the Applied Sciences study. It supersedes earlier results for the current analysis without moving old tags, overwriting historical scientific artifacts or changing the input archives. Corrected scope STATS19 uses 15 features, excluding special_conditions_at_site and carriageway_hazards, with six split-local model sets and eleven evaluation cohorts. Models are Dummy, unweighted/weighted multinomial Logistic and weighted LightGBM. Random-reference LightGBM selection uses each split's own training/validation records, correcting overlap in the historical shared-selection procedure. The fixed-parameter exclusion-2020 sensitivity is retained. Ordered Logit, matched-subset comparisons and tree-count extension are omitted from the corrected primary scope; their audit history remains available. CAS retains its independently audited temporal workflow and post-hoc urban/ sparse-speed removals, followed by corrected split-local random references. The V2 catalog selects 20 compact result tables. CAS H2 exports only nine temporal-test contrasts; 90 superseded random contrasts remain in the preserved V1 history, not the current CAS H2 export. No scientific source result was changed by this export-only correction. Validation Author-run reconstruction in two new Windows/Python 3.13.15 virtual environments completed all 22 STATS19 and 25 CAS stages. All 20 selected V2 result comparisons passed with the frozen tolerances (atol=1e-10, rtol=1e-8); exact fields were compared exactly. No fitted models, processed data, predictions or SHAP arrays were copied. Nine existing raw snapshot files passed size/SHA-256 verification; they were reused rather than freshly downloaded in this run. There were 159 passing applicable unit tests and seven passing standalone CAS audits. The two original historical D14 exact-provenance assertions remain separate documented exceptions, not relabeled as passing tests. The independent bounded historical check passed. See docs/FINAL_REPRODUCTION_VALIDATION.md and logs/final_analysis/final_reproduction_acceptance.json for evidence and scope. This is author-run same-machine validation, not third-party or cross-platform validation. Manuscript layout was not part of this acceptance. The release preserves the original bytes of newly sealed protocols, result tables and acceptance records through explicit Git attributes, preventing automatic line-ending conversion from invalidating their recorded hashes. Reproduce this version Use Python 3.13 from the extracted release source directory: python -m pip install --requirement requirements-lock.txt python download_and_verify_data.py download --dataset all python download_and_verify_data.py verify --dataset all python run_final_analysis.py --stage reproduce --dataset all --workspace ../final-reconstruction To continue an interrupted run, repeat the last command with --resume. --stage check is an author-side audit requiring existing analytical artifacts; it is not the first command for a fresh clone. See FINAL_ANALYSIS.md. Interpretation and archive boundaries Corrections were made after historical outcomes were known; they are not a new untouched-test experiment or preregistration. H1 remains metric-dependent; Macro-F1 gains do not establish uniformly safer LightGBM performance. Failed safety constraints, the 1200-round search limit, label-recording changes, unverified spatial generalization and dataset-specific SHAP designs remain explicit limitations. SHAP is descriptive, not causal. Raw records, models and record-level outputs are excluded from the software archive. Fixed data archives are unchanged: STATS19: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.22290566 (OGL v3.0). CAS: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.22296725 (CC BY 4.0). The software concept DOI is https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.22231696. The version-specific DOI will be added to the GitHub release description and the main-branch citation metadata after Zenodo archives this tag. The tag itself will not be moved for this metadata-only backfill.

View source

Similar papers

#computer vision Review Sep 2017

Agile Software Development Methods: Review and Analysis

This publication proposes a definition and a classification of agile software development approaches and analyses ten software development methods that can be characterized as being "agile" against the defined criterion.

P. Abrahamsson, O. Salo, Jussi Ronkainen et al. · 727 citations · ⚡54
#computer vision Jun 2008

The impact of agile practices on communication in software development

The study shows that agile practices improve both informal and formal communication, but indicates that, in larger development situations involving multiple external stakeholders, a mismatch of adequate communication mechanisms can sometimes even hinder the communication.

M. Pikkarainen, Jukka Haikara, O. Salo et al. · 401 citations · ⚡48
#machine learning Review Open access Oct 2014

Software development in startup companies: A systematic mapping study

The results indicate that software engineering work practices are chosen opportunistically, adapted and configured to provide value under the constrains imposed by the startup context.

Nicolò Paternoster, Carmine Giardino, M. Unterkalmsteiner et al. · 394 citations · ⚡54
#computer vision Review Mar 2008

Agile methods in European embedded software development organisations: a survey on the actual use and usefulness of Extreme Programming and Scrum

The results show that the embedded industry has been able to apply agile methods in its development processes and that the appreciation of the agile methods and their individual practices appears to increase once adopted and applied in practice.

O. Salo, P. Abrahamsson · 238 citations · ⚡9
#computer vision Open access Jul 2017

What happens when software developers are (un)happy

Consequences of happiness and unhappiness that are beneficial and detrimental for developers' mental well-being, the software development process, and the produced artifacts are found.

D. Graziotin, Fabian Fagerholm, Xiaofeng Wang et al. · 236 citations · ⚡13
#computer vision Open access Oct 2004

Mobile-D: an agile approach for mobile application development

The Mobile-D approach is briefly outlined here and the experiences gained from four case studies are discussed, which helped develop an agile development approach for mobile application development.

P. Abrahamsson, Antti Hanhineva, H. Hulkko et al. · 225 citations · ⚡18

Related blog posts

GPT-Lab Nov 3, 2026

Sovereignty Is the Option to Leave

Is your company’s AI sovereign? A practical guide for CIOs on AI vendor lock-in, EU Data Act switching, cloud sovereignty, and testing your exit plan before you need it. The post Sovereignty Is the Option to Leave appeared first on GPT-Lab.

Microsoft Research Blog Oct 30, 2026

From synthetic enterprise data evaluations to real Microsoft Copilot AI confidence

Evaluating Microsoft Copilot at enterprise scale requires test data that captures the full complexity of real organizations, yet real enterprise data contains sensitive information that cannot be used for evaluation under any circumstances. The post From synthetic enterprise data evaluations to real Microsoft Copilot AI confidence appeared first on Microsoft Research.

Microsoft Research Blog Oct 29, 2026

Microsoft Research Focus – Edition #97

Host Sowbhagya Suresh shares some of the latest news and cutting-edge research from across Microsoft—from understanding the challenges facing coding agents to uncovering how people use AI at work and improving extended-range weather forecasting. The post Microsoft Research Focus – Edition #97 appeared first on Microsoft Research.

We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads. See our Cookie Policy.