MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401174304 · doi:10.1155/2024/7504378

Research on Intelligent Vehicle Operation Risk Assessment and Early Warning Based on Predictive Risk Field

2024· article· en· W4401174304 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ruibin Zhang, Yingshi Guo

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Advanced Transportation · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAutonomous Vehicle Technology and Safety
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Key Research and Development Program of China
KeywordsWarning systemRisk assessmentComputer scienceField (mathematics)SimulationEngineeringRisk analysis (engineering)Computer securityTelecommunicationsBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In order to enhance the driving safety of intelligent vehicles in complex road scenarios, a method for vehicle operation risk assessment and early warning based on the predictive risk field is proposed. The temporal feature vector composed of the spatiotemporal state characteristics of the ego vehicle and surrounding traffic participants is taken as input data for the Attention‐Bidirectional Long‐Short Term Memory (Attention‐BiLSTM) model, which is trained to establish the desired mapping relationship. By predicting the motion state of the target vehicle and utilizing an improved risk field model based on the target vehicle of heading angle, the predictive risk field is obtained. This allows for the assessment of the ego vehicle operational risks. The risk warning model is integrated to provide risk early warning, and the safety path for the ego vehicle is planned based on the interaction between the predictive risk field equipotential lines and the cubic spline curves. Experimental results demonstrate that the proposed vehicle operation risk assessment and early warning model is effective in providing early warnings and safe path references for the ego vehicle in complex urban road test scenarios.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.602
Threshold uncertainty score0.499

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.299 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations4
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Advanced TransportationSame topicAutonomous Vehicle Technology and SafetyFrench-language works237,207