MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2298846706 · doi:10.14288/1.0073377

Before and after traffic safety evaluations using computer vision techniques

2012· article· en· W2298846706 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
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

VenuecIRcle (University of British Columbia) · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Measurement and Detection Methods
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceComputer visionComputer securityTransport engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Traditionally, road safety analysis has been undertaken using historical collision records. This approach to road safety analysis is reactive in that the analyst has to wait for collisions to take place before an action can be taken. An alternative approach is to study traffic conflicts or near misses which occur more frequently, can be clearly observed and are related to collisions. However, there are issues of subjectivity, reliability, and cost associated with the use of human observers. The use of computer vision techniques to automate the process of collecting traffic conflicts data can help mitigate these problems. This thesis presents the results of a before-after safety evaluation of a proposed design for channelized right-turn lanes. The evaluation uses an automated safety analysis approach to identify and measure the severity of traffic conflicts. The new design, termed “Smart Channels”, decreases the angle of the channelized right turn to approximately 70 degrees, and is considered to have safety benefits for both vehicle-pedestrian and vehicle-vehicle interaction. Data for three treatment sites and one control site, located in British Columbia, Canada, are evaluated using automated traffic conflict analysis that relies on computer vision for conflict detection. The results of the evaluation show that the implementation of the right-turn treatment has resulted in a considerable reduction in the severity and frequency of merging, rear-end, and total conflicts. The total average hourly conflict was reduced by a statistically significant 51 percent, while the average conflict severity was reduced by a statistically significant 41 percent. Many different traffic conflict indicators have been proposed and studied, but the methods of combining the results has not been well examined. This thesis considers four conflict indicators and examines methods of combining or aggregating the information provided by each indicator in order to better account for all components of risk in traffic conflicts. The four indicators are time-to-collision, gap-time, deceleration-to-safety time, and post-encroachment time. Two primary aggregation methods are studied: time aggregation and road-user aggregation. Time aggregation is appropriate for determining aggregate severity over periods of time, and road-user aggregation is used for normalizing risk to the volume of users.

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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.995
Threshold uncertainty score0.459

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.218 · 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