This framework combines copula modeling and machine learning to enhance crash severity prediction in urban environments.
Predicting road crash severity remains a major challenge in transportation safety research, requiring models that combine predictive accuracy, interpretability, and computational efficiency. This study introduces a Multi-Risk Index based on Copula Integration (MRI-Copula)—a hybrid framework that integrates Categorical Boosting (CatBoost) with SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) and Vine Copula dependence modeling to assess and predict crash severity. The approach leverages CatBoost–SHAP to quantify the marginal contribution of each risk factor while maintaining model transparency and employs copula-based tail dependence to capture the joint escalation of risk under extreme crash conditions. Using a dataset of 877 police-reported crashes from Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, the framework constructs three interpretable sub-indices—Environmental Risk Index (ERI), Behavioural Risk Index (BRI), and Systemic Risk Index (SRI)—representing distinct domains of crash causation. These indices are combined through a convex weighting parameter (α), optimized via cross-validation (optimal α = 0.80), ensuring a balanced integration of predictive and dependence-based information. Comparative evaluation across multiple classifiers—CatBoost, Light Gradient Boosting Machine (LightGBM), Histogram-based Gradient Boosting (HistGB), and Logistic Regression—demonstrated the robustness of the framework. The CatBoost + MRI-Copula configuration achieved the highest predictive performance (AUC = 0.986; F1 = 0.904), while LightGBM and HistGB offered comparable accuracy (AUC ≈ 0.958; F1 ≈ 0.89) at a fraction of the computational time (≤1 s versus 32 s for CatBoost), highlighting a trade-off between analytical precision and scalability. Consequently, the MRI-Copula framework provides a transparent and theoretically grounded foundation for data-driven road safety management. It bridges predictive analytics and decision support offering a scalable, interpretable, and policy-relevant tool for proactive crash risk mitigation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Alanazi et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: