V-RoAst: Visual Road Assessment Can VLM be a Road Safety Assessor using the iRAP Standard?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Road safety assessments are critical yet costly, especially in Low- and Middle-Income Countries (LMICs), where most roads remain unrated. Traditional methods require expert annotation and training data, while supervised learning-based approaches struggle to generalise across regions. In this paper, we introduce V-RoAst, a zero-shot Visual Question Answering (VQA) framework using Vision-Language Models (VLMs) to classify road safety attributes defined by the iRAP standard. We introduce the first open-source dataset from ThaiRAP comprising over 2,000 curated street-level images from Thailand, annotated for this task. We evaluate Gemini-1.5-flash and GPT-40-mini on this dataset and benchmark their performance against VG-GNet and ResNet baselines. While VLMs underperform on spatial awareness, they generalise well to unseen classes and offer flexible prompt-based reasoning without retraining. Our results show that VLMs can serve as automatic road assessment tools when integrated with complementary data. This work is the first to explore VLMs for zero-shot infrastructure risk assessment and opens new directions for automatic, low-cost road safety mapping. Code and dataset: https://github.com/PongNJIV-RoAst.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| 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".