MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416613325 · doi:10.1155/atr/9590651

Quantitative Analysis of Driving Environment Factors Affecting Takeover Time in Conditional Autonomous Driving Systems

2025· article· en· W4416613325 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
K B Lee, Sungho Park, Jaehyun So, Ilsoo Yun

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Advanced Transportation · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicHuman-Automation Interaction and Safety
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersKorean National Police Agency
KeywordsSAFERAutomationProcess (computing)Quantitative analysis (chemistry)Control (management)Field (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Understanding the conditions that affect takeover time (TOT) in conditional autonomous driving systems remains a challenging issue. The takeover process requires a seamless transition of control from the autonomous system to the driver when the system encounters situations it cannot manage. This study examines the effects of traffic conditions, road geometry, and weather on TOT using a linear mixed model to quantify their influence. Preliminary findings indicate that factors such as rain, gender, and age significantly extend control transition duration. These insights highlight the need for personalized designs in automated driving systems (ADSs) and takeover request protocols to accommodate diverse driver characteristics and environmental conditions. While the research utilizes a driving simulator, suggesting the need for field validation, it offers a foundational understanding that can enhance the safety and efficiency of conditional automation systems. This study contributes to safer ADS design and supports the commercial viability of conditional autonomous vehicles.

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)0.011
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.316 · 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