Three pedestrian phasing with audible pedestrian signals configurations: Experience of blind or visually impaired persons in Quebec City (Canada)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Audible pedestrian signals are strategically placed in some intersections to enhance safety, independence and accessibility for blind or visually impaired persons. This study appraised the sense and level of safety of blind or visually impaired persons with respect to 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. Experiments with 18 participants were conducted at six crossing corridors that were carefully selected by members of an advisory committee that included diverse stakeholders. In addition to the three possible pedestrian phasing with audible pedestrian signals configurations, situations involving short and long crossing distances were included. Each corridor was crossed three times by each participant. For each crossing, participants' trajectories were objectively determined using a satellite positioning system which uses a relative positioning mode. Participants’ sense of safety was also questioned after each crossing using a visual analog scale. The results obtained do not allow for the identification of an ideal configuration or even a configuration to avoid based on the level of safety. However, findings suggest that the exclusive phasing with directional audible pedestrian signals configuration is perceived to be the safest option by the participants. 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. • Adding APS heightens the sense of safety of blind or visually impaired pedestrians. • Exclusive phasing with directional APS is perceived as the safest configuration. • Results did not identify an ideal or avoidable configuration based on level of safety. • Appropriate training for blind or visually impaired pedestrians is 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 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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".