Application of proximal surrogate indicators for safety evaluation: A review of recent developments and research needs

被引：312

作者：

Mahmud S.M.S. ^{[1
]}

Ferreira L. ^{[1
]}

Hoque M.S. ^{[2
]}

Tavassoli A. ^{[1
]}

机构：

[1] School of Civil Engineering, University of Queensland (UQ), Queensland

[2] Department of Civil Engineering, Bangladesh University of Engineering and Technology (BUET), Dhaka

来源：

IATSS Research | 2017年 / 41卷 / 04期

关键词：

Indicators; Proximal; Safety evaluation; Surrogate; Traffic conflict;

D O I：

10.1016/j.iatssr.2017.02.001

中图分类号：

学科分类号：

摘要：

Although there have been a number of recent reviews on the use of traffic conflict techniques (TCTs), none have focused on the use of proximal surrogate indicators. This paper comprehensively reviews the development and application of proximal surrogate safety indicators to address this gap. There is a particular focus on more recent advancements in the application of such indicators. For each of the main indicators reviewed, the paper provides a synthesis of the main guiding principles, as well as the most prominent features, including critical or threshold values used in the past. In addition, the main advantages and disadvantages of the reviewed indicators are highlighted. Finally, a number of research gaps are identified together with recommendations for potentially useful avenues of future research. © 2017 International Association of Traffic and Safety Sciences

引用

页码：153 / 163

页数：10

共 88 条

[1]

Sayed T., Zaki M.H., Autey J., Automated safety diagnosis of vehicle–bicycle interactions using computer vision analysis, Saf. Sci., 59, pp. 163-172, (2013)

[2]

Zaki M., Et al., Application of computer vision to diagnosis of pedestrian safety issues, J. Transp. Res. Board, 2393, pp. 75-84, (2013)

[3]

Zheng L., Ismail K., Meng X.H., Traffic conflict techniques for road safety analysis: open questions and some insights, Can. J. Civ. Eng., 41, 7, pp. 633-641, (2014)

[4]

Sayed T., Zein S., Traffic conflict standards for intersections, Transp. Plan. Technol., 22, 4, pp. 309-323, (1999)

[5]

Chin H.-C., Quek S.-T., Measurement of traffic conflicts, Saf. Sci., 26, 3, pp. 169-185, (1997)

[6]

Shariat-Mohaymany A., Et al., Identifying significant predictors of head-on conflicts on two-lane rural roads using inductive loop detectors data, Traffic Inj. Prev., 12, 6, pp. 636-641, (2011)

[7]

Huang F., Et al., Identifying if VISSIM simulation model and SSAM provide reasonable estimates for field measured traffic conflicts at signalized intersections, Accid. Anal. Prev., 50, pp. 1014-1024, (2013)

[8]

Hyden C., Traffic conflicts technique: state-of-the-art, Traffic Safety Work with Video-processing, Green Series, 43, (1996)

[9]

Van der Horst A., A time-based analysis of road user behaviour at intersections, ICTCT Conference Proceedings (Krakow), (1990)

[10]

Minderhoud M.M., Bovy P.H., Extended time-to-collision measures for road traffic safety assessment, Accid. Anal. Prev., 33, 1, pp. 89-97, (2001)

← 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 →