Microscopic modeling of large‐scale pedestrian–vehicle conflicts in the city of Madinah, Saudi Arabia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
SUMMARY This paper presents a micro‐simulation modeling framework for evaluating pedestrian–vehicle conflicts in crowded crossing areas. The framework adopts a simulation approach that models vehicles and pedestrians at the microscopic level while satisfying two sets of constraints: (1) flow constraints and (2) non‐collision constraints. Pedestrians move across two‐directional cells as opposed to one‐dimensional lanes as in the case of vehicles; therefore, extra caution is considered when modeling the shared space between vehicles and pedestrians. The framework is used to assess large‐scale pedestrian–vehicle conflicts in a highly congested ring road in the City of Madinah that carries 20 000 vehicles/hour and crossed by 140 000 pedestrians/hour after a major congregational prayer. The quantitative and visual results of the simulation exhibits serious conflicts between pedestrians and vehicles, resulting in considerable delays for pedestrians crossing the road (9 minutes average delay) and slow traffic conditions (average speed <10 km/hour). The model is then used to evaluate the following three mitigating strategies: (1) pedestrian‐only phase; (2) grade separation; and (3) pedestrian mall. A matrix of operational measures of effectiveness for network‐wide performance (e.g., average travel time, average speed) and for pedestrian‐specific performance (e.g., mean speed, mean density, mean delay, mean moving time) is used to assess the effectiveness of the proposed strategies. Copyright © 2012 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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".