PURPOSES : The main purpose of this study is to identify directions for improvement of triangular islands installation warrants through analysis of the characteristics of crashes and severity with and without triangular islands on intersections. METHODS : The data was collected by referring to the literature and analyzed using statistical analysis tools. First, an independence test analyzed whether statistically significant differences existed between crashes depending on the installation of triangular islands. As a result of the analysis, individual prediction models were developed for cases with significant differences. In addition, each crash factor was derived by comparison with each model. RESULTS : Significant differences appeared in the "crash frequency of serious or fatal" and "crash severity" owing to the installation of triangular islands. As a result of comparing crash factors through the individual models, it was derived that the differences were dependent on the installation of the triangular islands. CONCLUSIONS : As a result of reviewing previous studies, it is found that improving the installation warrants of triangular islands is reasonable. Through this study, the need to consider the volume and composition ratio of right-turn vehicles when installing a triangular island was also derived; these results also need to be referred to when improving the triangular island installation warrants.

PURPOSES: Using the collected data for crash, traffic volume, and design elements on ramps between 2007 and 2009, this research effort was initiated to develop traffic crash prediction models for expressway ramps. METHODS: Three negative binomial regression models and three zero-inflated negative binomial regression models were developed for individual ramp types, including direct, semi-direct and loop, respectively. For validating the developed models, authors compared the estimated crash frequencies with actual crash frequencies of twelve randomly selected interchanges, the ramps of which have not been used for model developing. RESULTS: The results show that the negative binomial regression models for direct, semi-direct and loop ramps showed 60.3%, 63.8% and 48.7% error rates on average whereas the zero-inflated negative binomial regression models showed 82.1%, 120.4% and 57.3%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Conclusively, the negative binomial regression models worked better in traffic crash prediction than the zero-inflated negative binomial regression models for estimating the frequency of traffic accidents on expressway ramps.