MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7037290166

Driving simulator use and calibration for work zone merge sign evaluation

2018· dissertation· en· W7037290166 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueMOspace Institutional Repository (University of Missouri) · 2018
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTraffic and Road Safety
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDriving simulatorMerge (version control)SignageWork zoneCrashDriving simulationVirtual reality
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

[ACCESS RESTRICTED TO THE UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI AT AUTHOR'S REQUEST.] Work zones on highways have the potential to increase crash risk; therefore, efficient and noticeable signs play a critical role in enhancing highway safety. Some engineers have suggested that the traditional Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) merge sign cannot be easily recognized by the driving public due to its graphical nature. In addition, the advance warning areas in work zones exhibit a higher crash rate than the transition, activity, and termination areas, therefore it is beneficial to focus on signage that will impact the advanced warning area of the work zone. A driving simulator is a virtual reality tool that can simulate different driving scenarios and can complement traditional field work due to its feasibility, safety, and cost-effectiveness. In this thesis, a driving simulator was applied to model six scenarios, including three different types of merge signs: MUTCD (baseline), MoDOT, and Quebec. Each merge sign was tested twice in both right lane closed and left lane closed work zone situations. The lane closure scenarios were alternated out of concern that participants might become accustomed to staying in one specific lane. Participants were randomly assigned to a different scenario sequence, thus avoiding sequence bias. A post-experiment survey and a motion sickness screening questionnaire were used to assess driver impressions of the signage and comfort level with the simulator. The results of both the experiment and survey showed that for three different merge signs, participants sustained comparable speeds when passing work zones. For the MoDOT sign, participants merged earlier into the open lane than they did with the other two signs. The MoDOT sign also resulted in the smallest standard deviation of merge location among the three signs. This means that participants reacted to the MoDOT sign consistently. The work zone with the MUTCD sign resulted in the highest speed differential between the merge location and the work zone lane drop taper. Even though 29.4% participants incorrectly perceived the meaning of MUTCD signs compared with only 3.7% for the other two signs, the participants who did correctly understand the MUTCD sign rated the sign positively.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.164
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.190 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMOspace Institutional Repository (University of Missouri)Same topicTraffic and Road SafetyFrench-language works237,207