MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2227081553 · doi:10.1049/iet-its.2015.0001

Exploring walking gait features for the automated recognition of distracted pedestrians

2015· article· en· W2227081553 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueIET Intelligent Transport Systems · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGait Recognition and Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGaitComputer scienceGait analysisDistracted drivingPedestrianPhysical medicine and rehabilitationArtificial intelligenceHuman–computer interactionComputer visionPsychologyDistractionEngineeringTransport engineeringCognitive psychologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The current study examines the possibility of automatically detecting distracted pedestrians on crosswalks using their gait parameters. The methodology utilises recent findings in health science concerning the relationship between walking gait behaviour and cognitive abilities. Walking speed and gait variability are shown to be affected by the complexity of tasks (e.g. texting) that are performed during walking. Experiments are performed on a video data set from Surrey, British Columbia. The analysis relies on automated video‐based data collection using computer vision. A sensitivity analysis is carried out to assess the quality of the selected features in improving the accuracy of the classification. Classification results show that the proposed approach is promising with around 80% correct detection rate. This research can benefit applications in several transportation related fields such as pedestrian facility planning, pedestrian simulation models as well as road safety programmes and legislative studies.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.183
Threshold uncertainty score0.580

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.162
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.106 · 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