Expressway conflict risk mechanism considering the interactions between vehicle-group and road-segment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: There have been numerous studies on conflict risk for expressways, with the majority of previous studies focusing on road-segments' conflict risk while neglecting the impact of moving vehicles. In recent years, some studies have begun to work on vehicle-group without the consideration of the traffic on the road-segment. However, as the vehicle-group travels along the road-segment, the conflict risk of road-segment and vehicle-group will interact with each other. The aim of this study is to analyze the interactive mechanism of conflict risk between vehicle-groups and road-segments on expressways. METHODS: This study utilized high-resolution vehicle trajectory data to separately build conflict risk prediction models for vehicle-groups and road-segments. The best performing models were selected and explainability algorithms were applied. The analysis then focused on two aspects: (1) the influence of downstream high-risk vehicle-groups on upstream road-segment conflict risk and (2) the impact of geometric and traffic parameters of downstream road-segments on the conflict risk of vehicle-groups. RESULTS: The results show that vehicle-group characteristics significantly affect road-segment conflict risk. When high-risk vehicle-groups appear downstream, the conflict risk of the road-segment increases by about 6%, and the impact is stronger when the propagation distance is shorter. In turn, when the conflict risk of a downstream road-segment increases, this risk propagates upstream through the traffic flow, affecting the behavior of vehicle-groups and raising their conflict risk. A difference of 29% in vehicle-group conflict risk was observed depending on the median downstream road-segment conflict risk. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that vehicle-groups and road-segments interact in the propagation of expressway conflict risk. Integrating these two dimensions enables more accurate conflict risk prediction and analysis. This research provides a novel perspective by integrating vehicle-group and road-segment interactions for more accurate conflict risk prediction and analysis.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".