MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1972699964 · doi:10.1002/atr.5670410105

Driving situations and driver decisions at road traffic signals

2007· article· en· W1972699964 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Puay Ping Koh, Yiik Diew Wong

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Advanced Transportation · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicHuman-Automation Interaction and Safety
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNanyang Technological University
KeywordsDiagramAccelerationSIGNAL (programming language)SimulationComputer sciencePoison controlEngineeringAutomotive engineeringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Driver performance in responding to the green‐amber‐red signal change was studied based on a sample of 2316 last crossing and first stopping vehicles collected by unobtrusive observations at 10 junction approaches in Singapore. Two schemes, a speed‐distance diagram (S‐D) and an acceleration‐deceleration (A‐D) diagram, were used to demarcate the driving situations; the driver actions, as revealed outcomes of driver decision‐making, were mapped onto these diagrams. The speed‐distance diagram can give some indication on what a driver would possibly do. The more complicated acceleration‐deceleration diagram is useful for diagnosing the appropriateness of the driver actions. An application of the A‐D diagram was demonstrated, and several situations prone to red‐running were noted.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.972
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.021
GPT teacher head0.355
Teacher spread0.334 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations11
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Advanced TransportationSame topicHuman-Automation Interaction and SafetyFrench-language works237,207