Investigating Contributing Factors on Aggressive Driving Based on a Structural Equation Model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Tailored countermeasures that may significantly improve road traffic safety can be proposed and implemented if the relationship between various associated factors and aggressive driving is well understood. However, this relationship remains unknown, as driving behavior is complex, and the interrelationships among variables are not easy to identify. Considering this situation, this paper constructed a model based on a structural equation model (SEM) and factor analysis (FA), which is a multivariate statistical analysis technique used to analyze structural relationships. The model is applied in a case study using data from the Shanghai Naturalistic Driving Study. In the case study, 16 variables were grouped into five latent factors in the SEM, and the model fits the data well. Compared with other variables, the results show that age had the most significant positive impact on aggressive driving behavior (older drivers exhibited high aggressive driving frequency). Adverse weather negatively impacted driver behavior (lower speed and high longitude acceleration), which in turn negatively affected aggressive driving behavior. In addition, the results show that driver factors (such as age and sex) were the main factors influencing vehicle use (such as hard acceleration), and the environment was the main factor determining risky scenarios, where safety-critical situations increase. This paper provides a reference for defining and determining aggressive driving and a model for exploring the relationship between driving safety factors and aggressive driving, which can be used in real-world applications for improving driving safety with applications in advanced driver-assistance (ADAS) and traffic enforcement safety control systems.
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 | 0.005 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".