Evaluation of three pedestrian phasing with audible pedestrian signals configurations in Quebec City (Canada): an exploratory study of blind or visually impaired persons’ sense of safety, preferences, and expectations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: This exploratory study aimed to evaluate the preferences, expectations, and sense of safety of blind or visually impaired persons regarding three types of pedestrian phasing with audible pedestrian signals configurations that exist in Quebec City (Canada). These include: 1) exclusive phasing with non-directional audible pedestrian signals; 2) exclusive phasing with directional audible pedestrian signals; and 3) concurrent phasing with directional audible pedestrian signals. METHODS: Thirty-two blind or visually impaired persons were asked to complete a survey. Their preferences and expectations regarding audible pedestrian signals were documented through a series of simulations. Their sense of safety regarding the three existing configurations were also documented. Subsequently, semi-directed, individual interviews with 11 of the individuals who had completed the survey were conducted to build off the collected information. RESULTS: No formal consensus regarding many of the issues discussed were established as participants' responses varied too significantly. However, findings suggest that the exclusive phasing with directional audible pedestrian signals configuration is perceived to be the safest option by the participants. CONCLUSION: This study may have practical implications on the design of intersections (e.g., selection of a type of pedestrian phasing with audible pedestrian signal) and the training of blind or visually impaired pedestrians.IMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATIONThe addition of audible pedestrian signals to pedestrian signals heightens the sense of safety of blind or visually impaired persons.This study may have practical implications on the design of intersections with audible pedestrian signals and the selection of a type of audible pedestrian signals based on intersection characteristics.Since many participants reported a lower sense of safety when faced with concurrent phasing, it is recommended that more intensive orientation and mobility interventions be provided to blind or visually impaired pedestrians who use this type of traffic signals.Educating road users about blind or visually impaired pedestrians appears also essential.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".