ArticleScientific reports2026
Comparative evaluation of XGBoost, TabNet, and FT transformer models for fatal crash prediction under extreme class imbalance.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Fatal traffic crashes are a rare yet catastrophically consequential event in real-world crash data, typically constituting less than 1% of total records. This extreme class imbalance poses a fundamental challenge for machine learning-based severity prediction, as standard algorithms tend to ignore the minority class in favor of maximizing overall accuracy. This study investigates whether modern deep tabular learning architectures (TabNet, FT-Transformer) offer consistent advantages over the traditional gradient boosting method XGBoost in predicting fatal crashes under conditions of extreme class imbalance. The analysis is conducted on 5,676 traffic crashes recorded in Batman province of Türkiye between 2013 and 2022, with a fatal crash rate of only 0.8%. Methodologically, a leakage-controlled design was implemented through ex-ante variable selection, structured missing value handling, and SMOTE-based balancing applied exclusively to the training set. Model performance was evaluated not only with decomposition metrics such as ROC-AUC, but also with PR-AUC, Recall@K/Lift, and cost-sensitive analyses, which are more meaningful for imbalanced data. The results show that FT-Transformer achieved the strongest performance with ROC-AUC = 0.820 (vs. XGBoost: 0.752, TabNet: 0.760) and PR-AUC = 0.031 (approximately 3.9× above the random baseline of 0.008). It captured approximately 44% of fatal crashes in the riskiest 10% of cases, providing a ≈ 4.4-fold lift compared to random selection. Calibration analyses revealed that FT-Transformer produced more reliable risk scores: in the predicted probability band of 0.5-0.8, its observed positive rate reached the 8-15% range, representing a 4-7× elevation above the near-zero rates (0-2%) recorded for XGBoost and TabNet across the same probability range. These findings indicate that transformer-based tabular architectures offer consistent statistical, operational, and cost-sensitive advantages under extreme imbalance, supporting their use as decision-support tools in traffic safety management. To examine the generalizability of the framework beyond a single jurisdiction and a single time window, the analysis is complemented by (i) a temporal hold-out within Batman (training on 2013-2020, testing on 2021-2022) and (ii) external benchmarking on an independent publicly available rare-event crash corpus (n = 12,316; fatal rate = 1.28%) [61, 62]; the architectural ranking and rank-based operational gains are reproduced in both regimes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.