Perceptual Processes Used by Drivers During Overtaking in a Driving Simulator
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study investigated the control strategies and decision making of drivers who were executing overtaking maneuvers in a fixed-base driving simulator. It was found that drivers were frequently inaccurate in deciding whether it was safe to overtake in front of an oncoming vehicle. One source of error in this situation was the control strategy adopted by the driver; in several instances our drivers initiated an overtaking maneuver when the oncoming car's distance was above a critical value, even though there was not sufficient time to complete a safe maneuver. Adaptation to closing speed (produced by driving on a straight open road) also had large effects on overtaking behavior. For all participants, closing speed adaptation resulted in decisions that were delayed, of higher risk, and more variable. Actual or potential applications of this research include improved training for younger drivers and the development of in-car interfaces that reduce closing speed adaptation.
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 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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 it