MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2991896399 · doi:10.2495/safe-v9-n4-305-315

Modelling adolescent pedestrian crossing decision at unmarked roadway

2019· article· en· W2991896399 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Peng Chen, Jingmin Xie, Jingliu Yu

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Safety and Security Engineering · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEvacuation and Crowd Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsPedestrianPedestrian crossingComputer scienceTransport engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To address adolescent pedestrian safety problems at unmarked roadway, there is a need to understand adolescent pedestrian crossing decision behavior at unmarked roadway. cloud model, which is an uncertainty conversion model between qualitative knowledge description and quantitative value expression, was used to deal with adolescent pedestrian's cognitive uncertainty in the crossing decisionmaking process. Then the decision table for adolescent pedestrian crossing at unmarked roadway was established. Attribute reduction based on discernibility matrix and value reduction based on induction in the rough set theory were applied to reduce the decision table and extract the decision rules of adolescent pedestrian crossing at unmarked roadway. After the reduction, the conditional attributes were the vehicle speed and the distance between pedestrian and vehicle. Nine crossing decision rules were obtained, including five certainty rules. Finally, the proposed method was compared with the existing method. The results show that the prediction accuracy and area under the receiver operating characteristic (rOc) curve for the proposed method are 91.4% and 0.941 respectively, so it is superior to the logistic regression model, and the simple and intuitive pedestrian crossing decision rules can be obtained, which can lay the foundation for traffic safety simulation.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.257
Threshold uncertainty score0.534

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 head0.215
Teacher spread0.209 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations1
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Safety and Security EngineeringSame topicEvacuation and Crowd DynamicsFrench-language works237,207