Extracting Situations with Uneasy Driving in NDS-Data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<div class="section abstract"><div class="htmlview paragraph">Different types of driver workload are suggested to impact driving performance. Operating a vehicle in a situation where the driver feel uneasy is one example of driver workload. In this study, passenger car driving data collected with Naturalistic Driving Study (NDS) data acquisition equipment was analyzed, aiming to identify situations corresponding to a high driver's subjective rating of ‘unease’. Data from an experimental study with subjects driving a passenger car in normal traffic was used. Situations were rated by the subjects according to experienced ‘unease’, and the Controller Area Network (CAN) data from the vehicle was used to describe the driving conditions and identify driving patterns corresponding to the situations rated as ‘uneasy’. These driving patterns were matched with the data in a NDS database and the method was validated using video data.</div><div class="htmlview paragraph">Two data mining approaches were applied. The first was based on an ensemble classifier on general variables derived from the CAN-data to predict the subjective rating of segments of the data. The second used hierarchical clustering with a distance metric based on the principal variance components over segments. The ensemble classifier explained a large proportion of the variance when adjusting for driver and route. The hierarchical clustering method performed well, distinct clusters corresponding to a high driver subjective rating could be obtained.</div><div class="htmlview paragraph">Identifying situations with increased driver workload in NDS data is a complex task addressing a large variation of traffic situations and driver experiences. The proposed method is a first approach to help address this topic using data mining.</div></div>
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".