MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409246671 · doi:10.1155/atr/6161135

Intersection Complexity Quantification Considering Driver Behavior Characteristics and Subjective Cognition

2025· article· en· W4409246671 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Fengxiang Guo, Lei Yang, Chang’an Xiong, Wenchen Yang, Wei Li

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Advanced Transportation · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicHuman-Automation Interaction and Safety
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAnalysis and Testing Foundation of Kunming University of Science and TechnologyYunnan Provincial Science and Technology DepartmentYunnan Provincial Department of EducationKunming University of Science and TechnologyYunnan Provincial Department of Education Science Research Fund ProjectNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsIntersection (aeronautics)CognitionComputer scienceHuman factors and ergonomicsPoison controlTransport engineeringEngineeringPsychologyMedical emergencyMedicineNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Intersections with high complexity often present an increased risk of accidents, thereby reducing traffic safety. Current models for measuring intersection complexity primarily focus on objective factors that influence intersection operation. However, they fail to consider the impact of intersection complexity on driver behavior or the feedback mechanism drivers exhibit in response to complex traffic environments at intersections. This study aims to investigate the intrinsic connection between driver behavior and intersection complexity. A real‐vehicle experiment was conducted using three two‐phase signal‐controlled level intersections, each varying in objective complexity. Data on seven indices related to driver behavior characteristics and subjective cognition were collected from 28 participants during the experiment. Two methods were employed to analyze the data: (1) a descriptive analysis of driving behavior characteristics under varying levels of intersection complexity and (2) an entropy‐object topologically comprehensive evaluation method for measuring two‐phase intersection complexity based on driver behavior characteristics and subjective cognition. The results indicated that (1) drivers’ subjective perceptions of the complexity of two‐phase signal‐controlled intersections significantly differed from the calculated objective complexity, (2) differences in the effects of varying signal transition methods on driver behavior at complex intersections were not statistically significant, and (3) a two‐phase intersection complexity measurement model based on driver behavior characteristics and subjective perceptions was developed and validated. These findings contribute to understanding the intrinsic relationship between driver behavior and intersection complexity in urban settings. Future research could integrate intelligent algorithms to enhance the safety of autonomous vehicles navigating intersections.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.366
Teacher spread0.325 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Advanced TransportationSame topicHuman-Automation Interaction and SafetyFrench-language works237,207