A Study on Driving Load While Overtaking on Mountainous Two‐Lane Highways Based on Physiological Characteristics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The traffic environment of mountainous highways is more complex than that of nonmountainous highways, with higher driving loads, which increases the risk in overtaking. The changes in the driver’s pupils, eye gaze behavior, and heart rate can be used to evaluate the level of driving tension and safety. To analyze the driving load while overtaking on two‐lane highways in mountainous areas, an actual vehicle test was conducted. Twenty‐one drivers were divided into a skilled group and an unskilled group. The gaze time, gaze transfer characteristics, heart rate changes, and pupil area changes during the three stages of overtaking (intention, execution, and return) were compared and analyzed. The comprehensive evaluation of driving load during the overtaking process used the Technique for Order of Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS) method and Rank Sum Ratio (RSR) method. The results show that the two groups of drivers had the highest driving load during the overtaking execution stage and the lowest driving load during the intention stage. The driving load of overtaking on sections with poor‐sight distance was significantly higher than that on sections with good‐sight distance, and the risk in overtaking during the execution and return stages was highest on sections with poor‐sight distance. It is possible to reduce the driving load if the driver is familiar with the road conditions or has a rich driving experience. Compared to the unskilled group, the skilled group had lower driving loads at all stages of overtaking. The research results can provide a theoretical basis for optimizing traffic safety prevention and control technology on mountainous highways and for designing intelligent driving assistance.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".