Analysis of Driver Behavior and Intervehicular Collision: A Data-Based Traffic Modeling and Simulation Approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The emergence of intelligent connected vehicles (ICVs) is expected to contribute to resolving traffic congestion and safety problems; however, it is inevitable that ICV safety issues in mixed traffic (involving ICVs and human driven vehicles) will be a critical challenge. The numerical simulation of scenarios involving a mix of different driving profiles is expected to be an important safety assessment tool in the process of testing and validating ICVs, especially regarding extreme scenarios, including car collisions, which are rarely captured in real-world datasets. In this study, we propose a novel approach for car collision generation in numerical simulations based on the assumption that car collision occurrences are mostly associated with certain specific driver profiles. Using a dataset provided by the Next Generation Simulation (NGSIM) project, NGSIM 101 dataset, we identify three different driver profiles: aggressive, inattentive, and normal drivers. We then replicate car collision occurrences by varying the percentages of these three driver profiles in the simulated environment, allowing us to establish a relationship between driver profiles and car collision occurrences. We also investigate the severity of car collisions and classify them with respect to the driver profiles of the cars involved in the collisions. Our approach of replicating car collision occurrences in numerical simulations will facilitate the testing and validation of ICVs in the future, especially regarding the testing of ICV functionalities in dealing with 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 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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 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".