Driver identification using vehicle acceleration and deceleration events from naturalistic driving of older drivers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Driving is a common task that involves skill and individual preferences that can differ between drivers. The unique driving behaviours can be beneficial for differentiating drivers of shared vehicles and identifying differences between older drivers with normal and declining driving abilities. This paper presents a method for identifying individual drivers based on motor vehicle acceleration and deceleration events from their natural driving behaviour. We provide a novel approach to driver identification based on classification using multiple in-vehicle sensor signals collected in naturalistic conditions with anonymized driving locations. The dataset consists of thousands of trips from a selection of 14 stable-health older drivers (70 years and older) from their first year of the Candrive research study. We trained separate multiclass linear discriminant analysis classifiers to recognize unique patterns in their acceleration and deceleration events to predict the identity of the driver out of a group of drivers. For five different drivers, the acceleration and deceleration events were used to distinguish between drivers at 34% and 30% average accuracy, respectively. By taking a majority vote among the events, the accuracy improved to 61%, exceeding by about three times the null model of random guessing. This performance improvement continues when expanding the group from 2 to 14 drivers. The analysis shows potential for identifying drivers by the patterns in their driving maneuvers such as turning and stopping.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".