Developing Character Height Model for Tibetan–Chinese Bilingual Guide Signs Using Driving Simulation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As one of Tibet’s most vital traffic safety devices, guide signs are usually Tibetan–Chinese bilingual. Therefore, drivers need effective recognition of Tibetan–Chinese bilingual traffic signs for safe driving. This study aims to determine two design parameters of the Tibetan–Chinese bilingual guide signs: Tibetan character height (hT) and aspect (height to width) ratio. Two highway facilities were selected for the simulation experiment: a general highway intersection and a high-grade highway exit ramp. To incorporate drivers’ visual recognition characteristics, 20 Tibetan drivers and 20 Han drivers were invited to wear head-mounted eye trackers for a dynamic driving simulation experiment of visual identification of guide signs. Four layout designs were used to analyze Tibetan and Han drivers’ visual recognition characteristics. The regression model for hT was first developed based on the visibility theory of guide signs. Then, the character-height design values for the Tibetan–Chinese bilingual guide signs were established for different speed limits. The results of this study should help to optimize the design of traffic signs in Tibet and improve highway traffic safety.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".