MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2921339928 · doi:10.1155/2019/2867247

Drivers’ Perceptions of Smartphone Applications for Real-Time Route Planning and Distracted Driving Prevention

2019· article· en· W2921339928 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Khaled Shaaban

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Advanced Transportation · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTransportation and Mobility Innovations
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersQatar Foundation
KeywordsDistracted drivingSAFERDistractionSmartphone applicationPerceptionTransport engineeringComputer securityReal-time dataInstallationInternet privacyEngineeringComputer scienceBusinessMultimediaPsychologyWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Given the increasing importance and availability of traffic-related smartphone applications, understanding their potential use is vital, especially in developing countries. This research explores motorist perceptions of the installation and use of two smartphone applications—a distraction-prevention application and a real-time traffic information and navigation application—in Qatar, a rapidly developing country in the Arabian Gulf region. This study represents the first attempt to investigate the potential market for these types of applications in a region with a unique social and cultural environment. A questionnaire-based survey was conducted to examine the drivers’ interest in using both applications, their willingness to buy the applications, and their data privacy concerns. The results indicated that the potential market for these types of smartphone applications in Qatar is high. The potential for the real-time route planning application was found to be much higher than that of the antidistraction application, especially among female drivers. A high percentage of the drivers, especially younger and local drivers, were less enthusiastic about installing and using the distracted driving prevention application. Most of the participants willing to use both smartphone applications did not have data privacy concerns, but in return for allowing the applications to access their data, they expected some reduction in travel time and a safer trip. These findings provide a direction for the development of future policies and smart solutions in this region.

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.943
Threshold uncertainty score0.398

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.243 · 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

Citations21
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Advanced TransportationSame topicTransportation and Mobility InnovationsFrench-language works237,207