Effect of Cognitive Distraction on Physiological Measures and Driving Performance in Traditional and Mixed Traffic Environments
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Distracted driving is a dominant cause of traffic accidents. In addition, with the rapid development of intelligent vehicles, mixed traffic environments are expected to become more complicated with multiple types of intelligent vehicles sharing the road, thereby increasing the opportunities for distracted driving. However, the existing research on detecting driver distraction in mixed traffic environments is limited. Therefore, in this study, we analysed the effect of cognitive distraction on the driver physiological measures and driving performance in traditional and mixed traffic environments and compared the parameters extracted in the two environments. Sixty drivers were involved in the data collection, which included normal driving and two distracting tasks while driving in a simulator. Repeated-measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) was performed to examine the effect of cognitive distraction and traffic environments on all parameters. The results indicate that the effects of the pupil diameter, standard deviations (SDs) of the horizontal and vertical fixation angles, blink frequency, speed, SD of the lane positioning (SDLP), SD of the steering wheel angle (SDSWA), and steering entropy (SE) were significant. These findings provide a theoretical foundation for identifying the most appropriate parameters to detect cognitive distraction in traditional and mixed traffic environments to help reduce traffic accidents.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".