MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2097039284 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.1329639

Perceptual Framework For A Modern Left-Turn Collision Warning System

2009· article· en· W2097039284 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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicTarget Tracking and Data Fusion in Sensor Networks
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPerceptionCollisionTurn (biochemistry)Computer sciencePsychologyArtificial intelligenceComputer securityPhysicsNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Most of the collision warning systems currently available in the automotive market are mainly designed to warn against imminent rear-end and lane-changing collisions. No collision warning system is commercially available to warn against imminent turning collisions at intersections, especially for left-turn collisions when a driver attempts to make a left-turn at either a signalized or non-signalized intersection, conflicting with the path of other approaching vehicles traveling on the opposite-direction traffic stream. One of the major factors that lead to left-turn collisions is the human error and misjudgment of the driver of the turning vehicle when perceiving the speed and acceleration of other vehicles traveling on the opposite-direction traffic stream; therefore, using a properly-designed collision warning system will likely reduce, or even eliminate, this type of collisions by reducing human error. This paper introduces perceptual framework for a proposed collision warning system that can detect imminent left-turn collisions at intersections. The system utilizes a commercially-available detection sensor (either a radar sensor or a laser detector) to detect approaching vehicles traveling on the opposite-direction traffic stream and calculate their speeds and acceleration rates to estimate the time-tocollision and compare that time to the time required for the turning vehicle to clear the intersection. When calculating the time required for the turning vehicle to clear the intersection, consideration is given to the perception-reaction time of the driver of the turning vehicle, which is the time required by the driver to perceive the message given by the warning system and react to it by engaging the throttle. A regression model was developed to estimate perception-reaction time based on age and gender of the driver of the host vehicle. Desired acceleration rate selected by the driver of the turning vehicle, when making the left-turn movement, is another human factor that is considered by the system. Another regression model was developed to estimate the acceleration rate selected by the driver of the turning vehicle based on driver-s age and gender as well as on the location and speed of the nearest approaching vehicle along with the maximum acceleration rate provided by the mechanical characteristics of the turning vehicle. By comparing time-to-collision with the time required for the turning vehicle to clear the intersection, the system displays a message to the driver of the turning vehicle when departure is safe. An application example is provided to illustrate the logic algorithm of the proposed system.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.936
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.000
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.221 · 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