MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2891395548 · doi:10.1177/0361198118795004

In-Vehicle Passing Collision Warning System for Two-Lane Highways Considering Driver Characteristics

2018· article· en· W2891395548 on OpenAlexafffund
Udai Hassein, Maksym Diachuk, Said M. Easa

Bibliographic record

VenueTransportation Research Record Journal of the Transportation Research Board · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAutonomous Vehicle Technology and Safety
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsCollisionAccelerationSimulationComputer scienceGlobal Positioning SystemReal-time computingPosition (finance)Computer securityTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Passing collisions are one of the most dangerous traffic safety problems. These head-on collisions occur when the driver of the passing vehicle is distracted or does not assess the situation appropriately. The purpose of this study is to develop a passing collision warning system (PCWS) for drivers on two-lane highways to prevent passing collisions and improve road safety. This paper presents a framework and algorithm design for a PCWS that ensures that drivers have an adequate sight distance for a safe passing maneuver. The system uses an available radar sensor to detect the closest opposing vehicle traveling in the left lane and calculates its position, speed, and acceleration rate to estimate the time to collision and compare it with the time required for the passing vehicle to clear the lane. Realistic initial time and passing time models were established using actual experimental field data collected using a global positioning system (GPS) data logger device that was installed in the passing, impeding, and opposing vehicles and used to record the position and speed of different passing vehicles at 1-s intervals. The MATLAB simulation was developed and used to replicate real-life passing maneuvers and was also used to create the algorithm for the proposed warning system. The passing maneuver parameters were selected from probability distribution curves based on field data. The simulation model determines the relative distance and speed of the opposing vehicle at four different time intervals. The different factors that impact system accuracy were also examined.

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)0.003
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.259
Threshold uncertainty score0.775

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.285 · 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; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations6
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransportation Research Record Journal of the Transportation Research BoardSame topicAutonomous Vehicle Technology and SafetyFrench-language works237,207