The logic of empirical testing of accident prediction models

This paper explains the logic of empirical testing of accident prediction models. The key element of empirical testing is to make out-of-sample predictions of the number of accidents. This means that a model developed in sample A is applied, without modification, to predict the number of accidents in sample B. The procedure is illustrated in two samples formed by randomisation. A model fitted to the first sample was applied to predict the number of accidents in the second sample. The model was only partly supported. In general, any accident prediction model is likely to be merely a local statistical description of a particular data set. If tested by means of out-of-sample predictions, the model is very likely to be falsified. This does not mean that accident prediction models do not show general tendencies, but these tendencies are likely to be empirically supported only at a qualitative level, or at best an ordinal level of numerical measurement. In this sense accident prediction models are similar to many models developed in economics. The models predict the direction, and in some cases the relative strength of statistical relationships, but not their precise numerical values.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Traffic Safety Research
Published
2026-01-20
DOI
https://doi.org/10.55329/lpdp1271
Primary Topic
Occupational Health and Safety Research
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

The logic of empirical testing of accident prediction models

Rune Elvik
Traffic Safety Research
Occupational Health and Safety Research
article

The logic of empirical testing of accident prediction models

Rune Elvik
article en

Abstract

This paper explains the logic of empirical testing of accident prediction models. The key element of empirical testing is to make out-of-sample predictions of the number of accidents. This means that a model developed in sample A is applied, without modification, to predict the number of accidents in sample B. The procedure is illustrated in two samples formed by randomisation. A model fitted to the first sample was applied to predict the number of accidents in the second sample. The model was only partly supported. In general, any accident prediction model is likely to be merely a local statistical description of a particular data set. If tested by means of out-of-sample predictions, the model is very likely to be falsified. This does not mean that accident prediction models do not show general tendencies, but these tendencies are likely to be empirically supported only at a qualitative level, or at best an ordinal level of numerical measurement. In this sense accident prediction models are similar to many models developed in economics. The models predict the direction, and in some cases the relative strength of statistical relationships, but not their precise numerical values.

Traffic Safety ResearchVol. 10
Institute of Transport Economics (NO)
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 76%
Occupational Health and Safety Research
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

The logic of empirical testing of accident prediction models — Rune Elvik · Traffic Safety Research (2026) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS