The Impact of Pedestrian and Nonmotorized Vehicle Violations on Vehicle Emissions at Signalized Intersections in the Real World: A Case Study in Beijing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Emission around intersections has become an issue in the urban traffic network. This paper aims to investigate the impact of pedestrian and nonmotorized vehicle violations on emissions at mixed-traffic flow intersection based on the volumes of vehicles, nonmotor vehicles, and pedestrians. Also, it focuses on the arterial and collector intersections with high vehicle volume and limited space. Running red light and crossing intersection diagonally are two critical violations, accounting for 91.75% of effective violations (interference with vehicles’ operation). In this context, a violation blocking model is developed to estimate the blocking probability for each vehicle based on the volumes of pedestrians and nonmotor vehicles. The model includes two scenarios. (1) Through phase: the violation blocking model of running red light is developed based on the survival curve (the relationship between waiting time and running red light probability). (2) Left-turn phase: the violation blocking model at this phase includes two parts: (i) crossing the intersection diagonally model is developed for the first vehicle and (ii) running red light model is developed for subsequent vehicles. The existing emission model can estimate the emissions based on the blocking positions. In the case study, emissions increase with the vehicle volume approaching the saturated flow rate and the volumes of nonmotor vehicles and pedestrians increasing. Results show that the maximum emission increase of CO (carbon monoxide) for through phase and left-turn phase can reach 16.7% and 36.4%.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".