An Empirical Investigation of a Dynamic Brake Light Concept for Reduction of Rear-End Collision Accidents during Emergency Braking
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A potential application of optical looming manipulation is investigated: a dynamic brake light concept for potentially reducing the frequency of rear-end collisions in automobile driving. In a low-fidelity driving simulator, forty participants were instructed to follow a leading vehicle (LV) and appropriately respond to braking of the LV, under three visibility conditions: day, night-time with headlights, and night-time without headlights. During some LV braking events, separation and size of the brake lights of the LV were imperceptibly expanded or contracted, at one of two levels, to simulate an effective virtual time shift in the headway of the LV. Results show that this concept was effective only for very poor visibility conditions: at night with no headlights, for which LV brake lights were most salient. Subjects generally braked sooner when confronting a LV with expanding brake lights, and later for contracting lights, in comparison with the no manipulation case.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".