MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2012474707 · doi:10.1518/0018720054679542

Older Driver Failures of Attention at Intersections: Using Change Blindness Methods to Assess Turn Decision Accuracy

2005· article· en· W2012474707 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueHuman Factors The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTraffic and Road Safety
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersCentre for Transportation Engineering and PlanningTransport Canada
KeywordsChange blindnessCrashFlickerIntersection (aeronautics)Logistic regressionPedestrianPsychologyBlindnessComputer scienceTransport engineeringEngineeringArtificial intelligenceChange detectionOptometryMedicineMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A modified version of the flicker technique to induce change blindness was used to examine the effects of time constraints on decision-making accuracy at intersections on a total of 62 young (18-25 years), middle-aged (26-64 years), young-old (65-73 years), and old-old (74+ years) drivers. Thirty-six intersection photographs were manipulated so that one object (i.e., pedestrian, vehicle, sign, or traffic control device) in the scene would change when the images were alternated for either 5 or 8 s using the modified flicker method. Young and middle-aged drivers made significantly more correct decisions than did young-old and old-old drivers. Logistic regression analysis of the data indicated that age and/or time were significant predictors of decision performance in 14 of the 36 intersections. Actual or potential applications of this research include driving assessment and crash investigation.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.651
Threshold uncertainty score0.669

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.080
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.253 · 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