MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407719802 · doi:10.3389/fnagi.2025.1496224

Simulated driving behavior over the adult age span

2025· article· en· W4407719802 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Felix Menze, Nathan W. Churchill, Tom A. Schweizer, Simon J. Graham

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Aging Neuroscience · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicOlder Adults Driving Studies
Canadian institutionsSt. Michael's HospitalToronto Metropolitan UniversityHealth Sciences CentreUniversity of TorontoSunnybrook Health Science Centre
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsSpan (engineering)Life spanPsychologyDevelopmental psychologyGerontologyEngineeringMedicineStructural engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Motor vehicle accidents remain a leading cause of accidental death worldwide. Death and injury rates are particularly high for both young inexperienced drivers and elderly drivers. Understanding the behavioral changes that are associated with maturation and aging could inform assessments of driving performance and lead to new measures identifying at-risk drivers. To shed further light on such effects, this study aims to characterize simulated driving behavior across and within age groups using a large driving simulation dataset. Methods: The analyzed dataset consisted of 112 participants [47/112 (42%) female] between the ages of 17 and 85 (average ± standard deviation: 54 ± 22 years). Participants performed navigation in scenarios modeled after the standard licensing test of Ontario, Canada, which included a series of turns at intersections with different levels of complexity (e.g., involving oncoming traffic or pedestrians) and levels of distraction (requiring auditory responses to common-knowledge questions). Behavioral metrics were defined and investigated not only for the full completion of each task but also based on common subtasks (e.g., braking at an intersection), which were then compared across and within age groups (young, middle-aged, old). Results: Overall, young adults behaved similarly to middle-aged adults for basic tasks but showed differences during traffic navigation subtasks when distracted, such as starting to decelerate significantly later when approaching intersections. Old drivers, on the other hand, drove at lower average speed, stopped earlier at intersections, and left increased distances to pedestrians, but required significantly more time to complete the driving tasks. Conclusion: With rich detail arising from intra-task quantification, the results were consistent with and additive to previous literature showcasing that compared to middle-aged adults, young adults showed performance suggestive of riskier driving behavior, and old adults showed performance suggestive of caution consequent to declining driving ability. In particular, the intra-task quantification revealed that the driving of young adults was more impacted by the presence of distraction (e.g., delayed decelerating), whereas old adults prioritized safe driving (e.g., correctly braking at intersections) over responding to distractions. The study may be used as motivation for future studies of driving safety and accident prevention, and informed assessment of governmental regulations.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.028
GPT teacher head0.378
Teacher spread0.350 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Aging NeuroscienceSame topicOlder Adults Driving StudiesFrench-language works237,207