MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3162665729 · doi:10.1109/tits.2021.3076140

Driving Behavior Analysis Guidelines for Intelligent Transportation Systems

2021· article· en· W3162665729 on OpenAlexafffund
Mozhgan Nasr Azadani, Azzedine Boukerche

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAutonomous Vehicle Technology and Safety
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsIntelligent transportation systemProfiling (computer programming)Data collectionKey (lock)Risk analysis (engineering)Field (mathematics)Variety (cybernetics)Computer scienceAdvanced driver assistance systemsData scienceTransport engineeringEngineeringSystems engineeringComputer securityArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The advent of in-vehicle networking systems as well as state-of-the-art sensors and communication technologies have facilitated the collection of large volume and almost real-time data on vehicles and drivers, thus opening up future possibilities. Processing and analyzing this data provides unprecedented opportunities to offer remarkable insights and solutions for driving behavior analysis (DBA). Characterizing driving behavior plays a key role in a variety of research areas such as traffic safety, the development of automated vehicles, energy and fuel management, risk assessment, and driver identification and profiling. Advances in DBA-based driver inattention or drunk driver detection can help reduce fatal car crashes, and understanding the driving style (e.g. eco-friendly or aggressive) of drivers can contribute to fuel management and risk assessment of the drivers. These facts have led to a growing interest in addressing DBA challenges. This paper aims to present the state-of-the-art methodologies for DBA and provide a clear roadmap about the main current and future trends in DBA. To this end, we propose categorizing the current research on driving behavior based on the types of data employed for the analysis, the ultimate goals of the analysis, and the techniques based on which the driving data are modeled. We provide an overview of different data resources and available datasets for DBA. Moreover, we discuss the application of DBA along with the key research challenges in this field and potential future directions.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.038
Threshold uncertainty score0.000

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0060.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.017

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.247 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations162
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation SystemsSame topicAutonomous Vehicle Technology and SafetyFrench-language works237,207