The “Visual‐Behavior” Chain and Risk Prediction Model for Sedan Drivers Under the Influence of Container Trucks: A Case Study of Yangshan Port Freight Corridor
Bibliographic record
Abstract
With the development of the Shanghai International Shipping Center, the diversity of vehicle types on the highways and arterial roads near Yangshan port is continually increasing. Within such a container port corridor, large container trucks are primarily utilized for mainline transportation. Their larger size and significant inertia would increase psychological pressure on sedan drivers, and elevate their behavior risk. To investigate the effects of container trucks on drivers’ visual characteristics and driving behavior as well as to predict driving risk, firstly, this research conducted field tests in four scenarios surrounding the port. Visual characteristics and behavior data of sedan drivers were collected. Secondly, a “Visual‐behavior” chain model was established. The relationship between drivers’ visual characteristics, driving behavior, and driving risk was illustrated from the perspective of time‐series behavior patterns. Thirdly, three driving risk prediction models were built with Autoregressive Integrated Moving Average (ARIMA), Long Short‐Term Memory (LSTM), and ARIMA‐LSTM. The results indicate that the ARIMA‐LSTM model shows the most effective prediction performance. This research provides a field‐data comparative analysis of the driving risks influenced by a high proportion of container trucks. The findings contribute to understanding the unique mixed traffic visual environment around large‐scale container ports.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".