MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4411189698 · doi:10.1155/atr/2554540

Review of Driver Behavior Characteristics and Hazard Perception Enhancement in Low‐Illumination Environments

2025· article· en· W4411189698 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Pengfei Feng, Jing Liu, Bin Zhou

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Advanced Transportation · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTraffic and Road Safety
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAnhui Jianzhu UniversityNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsHazardPerceptionComputer scienceForensic engineeringPsychologyEngineeringBiologyNeuroscienceEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Low‐illumination environments significantly affect drivers’ behavior characteristics and hazard perception, making it one of the key factors contributing to the high frequency of traffic accidents in such conditions. Although nighttime driving accounts for a relatively small proportion of total driving mileage, the associated accident risk is significantly higher than during the day. This paper analyze the mechanisms of changes in drivers’ visual behavior, physiological and psychological states, and speed control characteristics under low‐illumination conditions and investigated the impact of individual factors (such as age, gender, and driving experience) and external environments on hazard perception. It summarized various existing training methods aimed at improving hazard perception and further discusses the quantification models for hazard perception. Finally, it summarized the limitations of the current research and explores future research directions, with the aim of providing theoretical and technical support for reducing traffic accident risks in low‐illumination​ environments.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.226 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Advanced Transportation→Same topicTraffic and Road Safety→French-language works237,207→