The use of gait parameters to evaluate pedestrian behavior at scramble phase signalized intersections
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Summary Pedestrian scramble phasing is usually implemented to reduce pedestrian‐vehicle conflicts and therefore increase the safety of the intersection. However, to adequately determine the benefits of scramble phasing, it is necessary to understand how pedestrians react to such an unconventional design. This study investigates changes in pedestrian crossing behavior following the implementation of a scramble phase by examining the spatiotemporal gait parameters (step length and step frequency). This detailed microscopic‐level analysis provides insight into changes in pedestrian walking mechanisms as well as the effect of various pedestrian and intersection characteristics. The study uses video data collected at a scramble phase signalized intersection in Oakland, California. Gait parameters were found to be influenced by pedestrian gender, age, group size, crosswalk length, and pedestrian signal indications. Both average step length and walking speed were significantly higher for diagonally crossing pedestrians compared with pedestrians crossing on the conventional crosswalks. Pedestrians were found to have the tendency to increase their step length more than their step frequency to increase walking speed. It was also found that, compared with men, women generally increase their walking speed by increasing their step frequency more than step length. However, when in non‐compliance with signal indications, women increase their walking speed by increasing their step length more than step frequency. It was also found that older pedestrians do not significantly change their walking behavior when in non‐compliance with signal indications. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".