MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3125957095 · doi:10.4271/2021-01-0869

Effectiveness of Advanced Driver Assistance Systems in Preventing System-Relevant Crashes

2021· article· en· W3125957095 on OpenAlexaff
Rebecca S. Spicer, Amin Vahabaghaie, Dennis Murakhovsky, George Bahouth, Becca Drayer, Schuyler St. Lawrence

Bibliographic record

VenueSAE International Journal of Advances and Current Practices in Mobility · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTraffic and Road Safety
Canadian institutionsImpact
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCrashAdvanced driver assistance systemsAeronauticsPedestrianEngineeringComputer scienceAutomotive engineeringTransport engineeringArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<div class="section abstract"><div class="htmlview paragraph">This retrospective cohort study uses survival analysis to estimate the effectiveness of Toyota ADAS in helping prevent system-relevant crashes. Toyota production data were merged with police reported crash files from eight U.S. states for crash years 2015 up to 2019 by 17-digit vehicle identification number (VIN). System-relevant crash scenarios included: striking vehicle in front-to-rear, single vehicle run-off-the-road, same-direction sideswipe, head-on, and pedestrian struck. The study vehicle cohort included 11 Toyota/Lexus models, model years 2015 through 2018, sold in the eight study states. ADAS technologies studied included automatic emergency braking (AEB), lane departure warning (LDW), lane keeping assistance (LKA), blind spot monitoring (BSM) and pedestrian automatic emergency braking (PedAEB). Among the study cohort of 2,394,913 vehicles, police reported 308,490 crashes. The crude crash rate ratio (CRR) was 0.61 for AEB-equipped versus non-equipped vehicles. However, the CRR does not adjust for differences in ADAS-equipped versus non- equipped vehicles. To adjust for group differences (confounding factors), Cox proportional-hazards (CPH) regression modeled the relative risk (hazard ratio, HR) of being in a system-relevant crash for vehicles with versus without the ADAS. CPH modeling found that AEB-equipped vehicles were 43% less likely (HR=0.57) to be the striking vehicle in a front-to-rear crash compared to non-equipped vehicles. The analysis was also stratified to look at the effect in intersection versus non-intersection crashes. BSM-equipped vehicles were 4% less likely (HR=0.96) to be involved in a same-direction sideswipe, though the differences were not significant (p=0.252). LKA-equipped vehicles were 9% less likely (HR=0.91) to run off the road. LDW and LKA did not have a significant effect on risk of same-direction sideswipe or head-on crash. PedAEB-equipped vehicles were less likely to hit a pedestrian (HR=0.84), but the hazard ratios were marginally significant (p=0.114). This study contributes new evidence of the effectiveness of ADAS in helping prevent system-targeted crashes.</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)0.000
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 score0.648
Threshold uncertainty score0.408

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.297 · 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

Citations38
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSAE International Journal of Advances and Current Practices in MobilitySame topicTraffic and Road SafetyFrench-language works237,207