MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4205240360 · doi:10.1109/tits.2021.3129506

A Robust Environment-Aware Driver Profiling Framework Using Ensemble Supervised Learning

2021· article· en· W4205240360 on OpenAlexafffund
Abdalla Abdelrahman, Hossam S. Hassanein, Najah Abu Ali

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicVideo Surveillance and Tracking Methods
Canadian institutionsQueen's UniversityUniversity of Ottawa
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUnited Arab Emirates University
KeywordsProfiling (computer programming)Computer scienceEnsemble learningArtificial intelligenceMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Driver profiling is the real-time process of detecting driving behaviors and computing a driver’s expected risk based on detected behaviors. Predicting risk based solely on the inclusion of detected behaviors may not be accurate because this method of predicting ignores the environmental (e.g., weather conditions, traffic density level) context of detected behaviors. Moreover, coupling detected behaviors with their environmental context can be leveraged towards creating personalized risk profiles for drivers in each driving environment. These profiles can be utilized in various ITS applications including personalized safety-based route planning. In this paper, a novel driver profiling environment-aware framework is presented. In the proposed framework, data processing is distributed over three computational layers to enhance the overall reliability of the system. A risk prediction model is hosted on the edge/fog to determine the driving risk while considering the joint effect of the in-vehicle detected behaviors and their environmental context. Risk values along with a driver’s compliance to warnings are both utilized to compute the risk profile on the cloud. Using SHRP2 Naturalistic Driving (ND) dataset, the development of a novel risk prediction model is presented herein with the underlying sub-processes of data preprocessing, error analysis, and model selection. Then we analyze both the performance of the developed risk prediction model and the overall performance of the proposed system. Validation results for the developed model indicate a good compromise between bias and variance. Moreover, the results of the overall risk scoring model reflect its robustness and reliability in assigning accurate risk scores.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.856
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.211 · 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.

Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations5
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation SystemsSame topicVideo Surveillance and Tracking MethodsFrench-language works237,207