Effects of Safety Facilities on Driver Distance Perception in Expressway Tunnels
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We investigated the effects of four safety facilities in expressway tunnels—information boards, flashing lights, human-voice broadcasts, and siren broadcasts—on driver distance perception by questionnaire surveys and field experiments. Results from a survey questionnaire given to 436 drivers indicated that each of the facilities, except the human-voice broadcast, was perceived to increase the driving safety. Consistently, results from field experiments involving 150 participants in China’s Xingshuliang Tunnel indicated that information boards, flashing lights, and siren broadcasts increased the distance perception accuracy of drivers, while human-voice broadcasts decreased this accuracy. The results of human-voice broadcasts may be due to the fact that drivers could not catch and understand the information they heard from human-voice broadcasts while driving in tunnels. This research can assist engineers in identifying the effective safety facilities in tunnels and provide a basis for prioritizing the implementation of these facilities, ultimately increasing driver distance perception accuracy and decreasing rear-end collisions.
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 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 it