scholarly journals A bee colony optimization (BCO) and type-2 fuzzy approach to measuring the impact of speed perception on motor vehicle crash involvement

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marjana Čubranić-Dobrodolac ◽  
Libor Švadlenka ◽  
Svetlana Čičević ◽  
Aleksandar Trifunović ◽  
Momčilo Dobrodolac
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marjana Čubranić-Dobrodolac ◽  
Libor Švadlenka ◽  
Svetlana Čičević ◽  
Aleksandar Trifunović ◽  
Momčilo Dobrodolac

Abstract This paper examines how a driver’s perception of various speed levels, as well as driver’s speed perception from different positions, affect the propensity for motor vehicle crashes (MVCs). Data collection is performed in twelve experiments. 178 young drivers assessed the speed level from four positions; three of them relate to the speed perception of other vehicles on the road, while the remaining one represents the assessment of own speed. At each position, three speed levels were assessed: 30, 50, and 70 km/h. To process data, seven Type-2 fuzzy inference systems (T2FISs) are designed and tested in a sense of compliance with the empirical data. As a result, a relationship between the various forms of speed perception and participation in MVCs can be quantified. To examine the initial conclusions, the optimization of each of these T2FISs is performed by implementing the bee colony optimization (BCO) metaheuristic. The BCO based algorithm proposed in this paper achieved an average improvement of 21.17% in the performance of the initial T2FIS structures. The final results indicate that the drivers whose speed perception of the vehicle they are looking at from the rear side, as well as of the own vehicle, is poor have an elevated risk toward participation in MVCs compared to other forms of speed perception. The best-found T2FIS structures can be used as a decision-making tool that quantifies the driver propensity for MVCs, which can be useful in various educational and recruitment procedures in the field of transportation and traffic safety.


Author(s):  
Alyssa Ryan ◽  
Francis Tainter ◽  
Cole Fitzpatrick ◽  
Jennifer Gazzillo ◽  
Robin Riessman ◽  
...  

2015 ◽  
Vol 105 (5) ◽  
pp. 859-865 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alva O. Ferdinand ◽  
Nir Menachemi ◽  
Justin L. Blackburn ◽  
Bisakha Sen ◽  
Leonard Nelson ◽  
...  

2018 ◽  
Vol 61 (7) ◽  
pp. 556-565 ◽  
Author(s):  
Morteza Asgarzadeh ◽  
Dorothee Fischer ◽  
Santosh K. Verma ◽  
Theodore K. Courtney ◽  
David C. Christiani

2020 ◽  
Vol 142 ◽  
pp. 105554
Author(s):  
Joseph A. Kufera ◽  
Ahmad Al-Hadidi ◽  
Daniel G. Knopp ◽  
Zachary D.W. Dezman ◽  
Timothy J. Kerns ◽  
...  

2006 ◽  
Vol 38 (4) ◽  
pp. 723-727 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amy E. Donaldson ◽  
Lawrence J. Cook ◽  
Caroline B. Hutchings ◽  
J. Michael Dean

Author(s):  
John S. Miller ◽  
Duane Karr

Motor vehicle crash countermeasures often are selected after an extensive data analysis of the crash history of a roadway segment. The value of this analysis depends on the accuracy or precision with which the crash itself is located. yet this crash location only is as accurate as the estimate of the police officer. Global Positioning System (GPS) technology may have the potential to increase data accuracy and decrease the time spent to record crash locations. Over 10 months, 32 motor vehicle crash locations were determined by using both conventional methods and hand-held GPS receivers, and the timeliness and precision of the methods were compared. Local crash data analysts were asked how the improved precision affected their consideration of potential crash countermeasures with regard to five crashes selected from the sample. On average, measuring a crash location by using GPS receivers added up to 10 extra minutes, depending on the definition of the crash location, the technology employed, and how that technology was applied. The average difference between conventional methods of measuring the crash location and either GPS or a wheel ranged from 5 m (16 ft) to 39 m (130 ft), depending on how one defined the crash location. Although there are instances in which improved precision will affect the evaluation of crash countermeasures, survey respondents and the literature suggest that problems with conventional crash location methods often arise from human error, not a lack of precision inherent in the technology employed.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document