MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2796327494 · doi:10.4271/2018-01-0531

Driver Response Time to Cyclist Path Intrusions

2018· article· en· W2796327494 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Ryan Toxopeus, Shady Attalla, Sam Kodsi, Michele Oliver

Bibliographic record

VenueSAE technical papers on CD-ROM/SAE technical paper series · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAutonomous Vehicle Technology and Safety
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaOntario Centres of Excellence
KeywordsComputer sciencePath (computing)Response timeComputer securityComputer networkComputer graphics (images)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<div class="section abstract"><div class="htmlview paragraph">Motor vehicle crashes with cyclists are on the rise, with a six percent increase in fatal crashes from 2006 to 2015 in the USA. Although some research exists on the response time of drivers to some types of path intrusions, data on the perception-response of through drivers to cyclists who fail to stop at a stop sign, and ride into the path of the vehicle has not been researched. The purpose of this study was to quantify the Driver Response Time (DRT) to a cyclist that intrudes perpendicularly in front of a through vehicle at an intersection where the driver has the right-of-way. The DRT was measured from when the cyclist is positioned at the stop sign until the driver reacts, whether by touching the brake pedal, swerving (steering wheel angle change of at least 2 degrees), accelerating, or a combination of those responses.</div><div class="htmlview paragraph">26 (N<sub>Female</sub> = 13; N<sub>Male</sub> = 13) university aged licensed volunteer drivers participated in the study conducted at the University of Guelph Driving Research in Virtual Environments (DRiVE) lab using an Oktal complete vehicle driving simulator. After a brief practice drive to acclimatize to the virtual environment, participants completed the approximately 10 minute experiment drive during which the cyclist hazard was presented. About one quarter of drivers crashed into the cyclist, with a mean time-to-impact of 3.26 seconds. There were no gender differences in terms of DRT or collision rates.</div></div>

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.960
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.007

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.214 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations11
Published2018
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSAE technical papers on CD-ROM/SAE technical paper seriesSame topicAutonomous Vehicle Technology and SafetyFrench-language works237,207