Classification and Prediction of Vehicle Lane‐Changing Crash Risk Levels Based on Video Trajectory Data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To investigate the potential lane‐changing collision risks that may arise between vehicles during lane changes and those in the original lane, a model for vehicle lane‐changing collision risk is constructed specifically for this scenario, and a research analysis is conducted. First, based on vehicle trajectory data, a sample set capturing the relationships between vehicles traveling in a straight line and those changing lanes laterally is extracted and built. Interpolation methods are then applied to fill in missing values, outliers are eliminated, and data noise is smoothed during preprocessing. After preprocessing, a total of 468 vehicle pairs and 265,392 data points are obtained. Second, a real‐time collision time model is established based on the preprocessed data, and collision risk probabilities are calculated accordingly. Then, the collision risks are classified into four levels based on whether the vehicle on the side actually changes lanes and the severity of the collision risks. Finally, a light gradient boosting machine (LightGBM) learning method is adopted to predict the risk levels and analyze the main factors that significantly impact the severity of collision risks. The results indicate that the longitudinal distance between the target vehicle and the preceding vehicle is the most critical influencing factor, followed by the speed of the target vehicle itself, and then the speed difference between the target vehicle and the preceding vehicle. The influence of other factors is relatively similar and does not have a significant impact.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".