Factors affecting injury severity at pedestrian crossing locations with Rectangular RAPID Flashing Beacons (RRFB) using XGBoost and random parameters discrete outcome models.

This paper evaluates the effectiveness of Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFB) on crash severity. The study used and compared XGBoost and Random Parameters Discrete Outcome Models (RPDOM) respectively. The dataset comprises of 312 pedestrian crossing locations, among which 154 treatment locations were provided with the Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFB) and 158 control locations without RRFB. These control locations have similar roadway, traffic, and land use characteristics of that of the treatment locations but are not treated with RRFB or other pedestrian crossing countermeasures. This study shows the impact of RRFB and other factors on severity of nighttime, pedestrian, total and rear-end crashes. Crash severity data was compiled from driver, vehicle, and event level data of each crash. Due to availability of larger number of observations for total (35,553), rear-end (15,675) and nighttime crashes (8,144) XGBoost was used, and due to less observations for pedestrian crashes (369), it was modeled using RPDOM. The results showed positive impact of RRFB for the reduction of nighttime crashes. It was noted that RRFB reduces the K and A nighttime crashes according to the SHAP values from the XGBoost model but does not have the desired significance for rear end and overall total crashes in the study area. From the RPDOM, it was seen that RRFB showed statistically significant reduction in injury severity of pedestrian crashes and nighttime crashes. To compare the two models, nighttime crashes were modeled using both the techniques, the prediction accuracy of XGBoost Model was 97% which was much greater than that of the RPDOM at 73.8% prediction accuracy. Thus, both XGBoost and the RPDOM model for showed positive impact of installing RRFB in reducing the severity of nighttime crashes.

Investigating surrogate safety measures at midblock pedestrian crossings using multivariate models with roadside camera data.

This study aims to evaluate and compare Surrogate Safety Measures (SSMs) at five midblock Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFB) and two midblock Pedestrian Hybrid Beacons (PHB) sites in Florida using extensive video data collected over the study period of July to November 2021. Computer vision and data processing resulted in four pedestrian SSMs, namely spatial gap, temporal gap, relative time to collision (RTTC) and Post Encroachment Time (PET). An initial investigation of the SSMs using Mann-Whitney-Wilcoxon tests revealed significant differences in the SSM values across different treatment types and hours of the day. Additionally, univariate regression of spatial gap, and multivariate regression of temporal gap, RTTC and PET revealed significant differences of SSMs across RRFB and PHB sites. The study considered both linear and non-linear (gamma, inverse Gaussian and lognormal) regression models. After considering various traffic and operational parameters, the data were aggregated for each pedestrian-vehicle interaction on each lane to create a total of 395 observations. The SSMs included average spatial gap, temporal gap, RTTC and PET for each interaction of pedestrian and vehicle on each lane. The results indicated that non-linear models performed better than the linear models. Moreover, the presence of the PHB, weekday, signal activation, lane count, pedestrian speed, vehicle speed, land use mix, morning period and pedestrian starting position from the sidewalk have been found to be significant determinants of the SSMs. Results also suggest temporal SSMs increase at the PHB sites compared to the RRFB sites, indicating an improvement of traffic safety at PHB sites. However, the spatial gap decreased for PHB sites compared to the RRFB sites, which suggests that pedestrians tend to start to cross the RRFB sites when they perceive vehicles to be further away than at the PHB sites.

Effect of signal timing on vehicles' near misses at intersections.

Driving characteristics often vary between the different states of the signal. During red and yellow phase, drivers tend to speed up and reduce the following distance which in turn increases the possibility of rear end crashes. Intersection safety, therefore, relies on the correct modelling of signal phasing and timing parameters, and how drivers respond to its changes. This paper aims to identify the relationship between surrogate safety measures and signal phasing. Unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) video data has been used to study a major intersection. Post encroachment time (PET) between vehicles was calculated from the video data as well as speed, heading and relevant signal timing parameters such as all red time, red clearance time, yellow time, etc. Random parameter ordered logit model was used to model the relationship between PET and signal timing parameters. Overall, the results showed that yellow time and red clearance time is positively related to PETs. The model was also able to identify certain signal phases that could be a potential safety hazard and would need to be retimed by considering the PETs. The odds ratios from the models also indicate that increasing the mean yellow and red clearance times by one second can improve the PET levels by 10% and 3%, respectively.

Assessing driving behavior upstream of work zones by detecting response points in speed profile: A naturalistic driving study.

Objective: To assess driving behavior when presented with different work zone features such as signs. Driving behavior upstream of a work zone is of interest since this is the point where drivers need to slow or react to upcoming conflicts such as lane closures, congested traffic, or presence of workers and equipment.Methods: Using 299 time series traces from four-lane roadways with both shoulder and lane closure scenario from the naturalistic driving study, this study analyzed driving behavior by detecting response points within the advance warning area from the first sign to the start of work zone. Response point was defined as the point where drivers reduced speed by a certain threshold. A mixed effect logistic model was developed to assess the relationship between driver response and work zone characteristics.Results: Results indicated the first work zone sign a driver encountered in the immediate area upstream of the work zone was not significantly likely to elicit a driver response. The model found lane ends, speed limit, and active changeable message signs (CMS) as statistically significant. Since more than one sign can be legible to the driver at the same time, the effect of overlapping signs was evaluated, but was not found to have significant effect on the driver response. In general, drivers were more likely to show a response to the signs the closer they got to the start of the work zone. Static work zone speed limit and dynamic speed feedback signs were both found to be more likely to elicit a response as compared to normal speed limit signs (non-work zone related). Drivers who were traveling over the posted speed limit were more likely to show response at any given work zone signs with the exception of the first sign. In addition, driver distraction, and driver information like age, gender, experience and other environmental factors were not found to be significant in the model.Conclusions: Overall, drivers were likely to show a response at the lane ends, work zone speed limit signs, and speed feedback signs.