A generalized driving risk assessment on high-speed highways using field theory

IF 12.5 1区 工程技术 Q1 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Yang-Jun Joo , Eui-Jin Kim , Dong-Kyu Kim , Peter Y. Park
{"title":"A generalized driving risk assessment on high-speed highways using field theory","authors":"Yang-Jun Joo ,&nbsp;Eui-Jin Kim ,&nbsp;Dong-Kyu Kim ,&nbsp;Peter Y. Park","doi":"10.1016/j.amar.2023.100303","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>This study presents a new safety measure derived from field theory. It evaluates the risk arising from the various concurrent conflicts within a platoon that can occur on high-speed highway driving situations, such as car-following, yielding, and lane changing. We defined the risk field as a finite scalar field produced by traveling vehicles on the road, and we defined the conflict field as the overlapping risk field between any vehicles in proximity on the roadway. The study used a probabilistic trajectory prediction model to construct risk fields and an approximation method to reduce the computational time for real-time applications. To demonstrate the applicability of the proposed new measure, we applied it to real-world trajectory data (NGSIM data from US Highway 101). We compared the results with three traditional conflict-based safety measures: post-encroachment time (PET), modified time-to-collision (MTTC), and deceleration rate to avoid a crash (DRAC). The new measure produced seamless and continuous risk estimations even during time windows when the other measures could not estimate the risk between vehicles. This is a major advantage over traditional measures. The study also developed visual displays of the estimated conflict fields to provide safety analysts with an intuitive and fast understanding of the results of the safety assessments made using the conflict field measure. We conclude that the proposed new safety measure provides a robust, reliable, and improved assessment of the risk involved in expected future mixed-traffic environments that involve both human-driven vehicles and automated vehicles in the future.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":47520,"journal":{"name":"Analytic Methods in Accident Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":12.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Analytic Methods in Accident Research","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2213665723000386","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This study presents a new safety measure derived from field theory. It evaluates the risk arising from the various concurrent conflicts within a platoon that can occur on high-speed highway driving situations, such as car-following, yielding, and lane changing. We defined the risk field as a finite scalar field produced by traveling vehicles on the road, and we defined the conflict field as the overlapping risk field between any vehicles in proximity on the roadway. The study used a probabilistic trajectory prediction model to construct risk fields and an approximation method to reduce the computational time for real-time applications. To demonstrate the applicability of the proposed new measure, we applied it to real-world trajectory data (NGSIM data from US Highway 101). We compared the results with three traditional conflict-based safety measures: post-encroachment time (PET), modified time-to-collision (MTTC), and deceleration rate to avoid a crash (DRAC). The new measure produced seamless and continuous risk estimations even during time windows when the other measures could not estimate the risk between vehicles. This is a major advantage over traditional measures. The study also developed visual displays of the estimated conflict fields to provide safety analysts with an intuitive and fast understanding of the results of the safety assessments made using the conflict field measure. We conclude that the proposed new safety measure provides a robust, reliable, and improved assessment of the risk involved in expected future mixed-traffic environments that involve both human-driven vehicles and automated vehicles in the future.

基于场理论的高速公路驾驶风险广义评价
本研究提出了一种基于场论的新的安全措施。它评估了在高速公路行驶情况下,车队内可能发生的各种并发冲突所产生的风险,如跟车、让行和变道。我们将风险场定义为道路上行驶车辆产生的有限标量场,并将冲突场定义为公路上任何邻近车辆之间的重叠风险场。该研究使用概率轨迹预测模型来构建风险场,并使用近似方法来减少实时应用的计算时间。为了证明所提出的新措施的适用性,我们将其应用于真实世界的轨迹数据(来自美国101号公路的NGSIM数据)。我们将结果与三种传统的基于冲突的安全措施进行了比较:侵占后时间(PET)、修正碰撞时间(MTTC)和避免碰撞的减速率(DRAC)。即使在其他措施无法估计车辆之间的风险的时间窗口内,新措施也能产生无缝和连续的风险估计。与传统措施相比,这是一个主要优势。该研究还开发了估计冲突场的可视化显示,使安全分析师能够直观快速地了解使用冲突场测量进行的安全评估的结果。我们得出的结论是,拟议的新安全措施对未来混合交通环境中涉及的风险提供了一个稳健、可靠和改进的评估,该环境涉及未来的人工驾驶车辆和自动驾驶车辆。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
22.10
自引率
34.10%
发文量
35
审稿时长
24 days
期刊介绍: Analytic Methods in Accident Research is a journal that publishes articles related to the development and application of advanced statistical and econometric methods in studying vehicle crashes and other accidents. The journal aims to demonstrate how these innovative approaches can provide new insights into the factors influencing the occurrence and severity of accidents, thereby offering guidance for implementing appropriate preventive measures. While the journal primarily focuses on the analytic approach, it also accepts articles covering various aspects of transportation safety (such as road, pedestrian, air, rail, and water safety), construction safety, and other areas where human behavior, machine failures, or system failures lead to property damage or bodily harm.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信