Lane-specific speed analysis in urban work zones with computer vision

References

• American National Standards. 1984. Electric speedometer specification, on road: SAE J1226 FEB83. Warrendale (Pennsylvania): Society of Automotive Engineers.
   Google Scholar
• Bernardin K, Stiefelhagen R. 2008. Evaluating multiple object tracking performance: the CLEAR MOT metrics. EURASIP J Image Video Process. 2008:1–10. doi:10.1155/2008/246309
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bewley A, Ge Z, Ott L, Ramos F, Upcroft B. 2016. Simple online and realtime tracking. Paper presented at: International Conference on Image Processing, IEEE; September 25–28, Phoenix, Arizona, USA.
   Google Scholar
• Bharadwaj N, Edara P, Sun C. 2019. Risk factors in work zone safety events: a naturalistic driving study analysis. Transp Res Rec. 2673(1):379–387. doi:10.1177/0361198118821630
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Campbell JL, Lichty MG, Brown JL, Richard CM, Graving JS, Graham J, O’laughlin M, Torbic D, Harwood D. 2012. Nchrp report 600: human factors guidelines for road systems. Transp Res Board.
   Google Scholar
• Chandler B, Kehoe N, O’Donnell C, Luttrell T, Perry E. 2013. Work zone safety data collection and analysis guide. Washington (DC): US Department Transportation Federal Highway Administration.
   Google Scholar
• Cheng Y, Parker ST, Ran B, Noyce DA. 2012. Enhanced analysis of work zone safety through integration of statewide crash and lane closure system data. Transp Res Rec. 2291(1):17–25. doi:10.3141/2291-03
   Google Scholar
• d’Agostino RB. 1971. An omnibus test of normality for moderate and large size samples. Biometrika. 58(2):341–348.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Davis J, Goadrich M. 2006. The relationship between precision-recall and ROC curves. Paper presented at: Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on Machine Learning, Association for Computing Machinery; June 25-29, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA doi:10.1145/1143844.1143874
   Google Scholar
• Debnath AK, Haworth N, Blackman R. 2021. Risk to workers or vehicle damage: what makes drivers slowdown in work zones? Traffic Inj Prev. 22(2):177–181. doi:10.1080/15389588.2021.1878354
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Finch DJ, Kompfner P, Lockwood CR, Maycock G. 1994. Speed, speed limits and crashes. Project Record S211G/RB/Project Report PR 58. Crowthorne, Berkshire, UK: Transport Research Laboratory TRL.
   Google Scholar
• Finley MD, Jenkins J, McAvoy DS. 2015. Motorists’ speed response to nonvariable and variable work zone speed limits and other work zone conditions. Transp Res Rec. 2485(1):70–77. doi:10.3141/2485-09
   Google Scholar
• Gong C, Zhang Y. 2020. Urban traffic data imputation with detrending and tensor decomposition. IEEE Access. 8:11124–11137. doi:10.1109/ACCESS.2020.2964299
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goutte C, Gaussier E. 2005, March 21–23, A probabilistic interpretation of precision, recall and F-score, with implication for evaluation. In: European conference on information retrieval, Springer; Santiago de Compostela, Spain.
   Google Scholar
• Gupta S, Singh Y, Scholar PMT, Tiwari G. 2014. Driver behaviour and warning signs in highway work zones. Paper presented at: Transportation Research Board 93rd Annual Meeting; January 12–16, Washington DC, USA.
   Google Scholar
• Hague D. 2014. Accuracy of retained speedometer readings. Paper presented at: Proceedings of the 11th Institute of Traffic Accident Investigators International Conference; April 5-6, Solihull, United Kingdom.
   Google Scholar
• He K, Zhang X, Ren S, Sun J. 2016. Deep residual learning for image recognition. Paper presented at: Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, IEEE; June 18-22, Las Vegas, NV, USA.
   Google Scholar
• Huang T. 2018. Traffic speed estimation from surveillance video data. Paper presented at: Proceedings of IEEE Conference of Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition Workshops, IEEE; June 18-22, 2018; Salt Lake City, Utah, USA.
   Google Scholar
• Jocher G. 2020. Yolov5. [Accessed 2022 May]. https//github com/ultralytics/yolov5.
   Google Scholar
• La Torre F, Domenichini L, Nocentini A. 2017. Effects of stationary work zones on motorway crashes. Saf Sci. 92:148–159. doi:10.1016/j.ssci.2016.10.008
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• LeCun Y, Bengio Y, Hinton G. 2015. Deep learning. Nature. 521(7553):436–444. doi:10.1038/nature14539
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li L, Zhang D. 2018. Merging vehicles and lane speed-flow relationship in a work zone. Sustainability. 10(7):2210. doi:10.3390/su10072210
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lin T-Y, Goyal P, Girshick R, He K, Dollár P. 2017. Focal loss for dense object detection. Paper presented at: Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision, IEEE; October 22-29, 2017; Venice, Italy.
   Google Scholar
• Lin T-Y, Maire M, Belongie S, Hays J, Perona P, Ramanan D, Dollár P, Zitnick CL. 2014. Microsoft coco: common objects in context. Paper presented at: ECCV: European Conference on Computer Vision. Springer; September 6-12, Zurich, Switzerland.
   Google Scholar
• Nnaji C, Gambatese J, Lee HW, Zhang F. 2020. Improving construction work zone safety using technology: a systematic review of applicable technologies. J Traffic Transp Eng. 7(1):61–75. doi:10.1016/j.jtte.2019.11.001
   Google Scholar
• Olsen ECB, Lee SE, Wierwille WW, Goodman MJ. 2002. Analysis of distribution, frequency, and duration of naturalistic lane changes. In: Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting. Vol. 46, Los Angeles, CA, USA: SAGE Publications. doi:10.1177/154193120204602203
   Google Scholar
• Paaswell RE, Baker RF, Rouphail NM, Ramkumar R. 2004. TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM Project 2003-27: Identification of Traffic Control Devices for Mobile and Short Duration Work Operations.
   Google Scholar
• Papadimitriou E, Filtness A, Theofilatos A, Ziakopoulos A, Quigley C, Yannis G. 2019. Review and ranking of crash risk factors related to the road infrastructure. Accid Anal Prev. 125:85–97. doi:10.1016/j.aap.2019.01.002
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pi Y, Duffield N, Behzadan AH, Lomax T. 2021. Computer vision and multi-object tracking for traffic measurement from campus monitoring cameras. Paper presented at: ASCE International Conference on Computing in Civil Engineering, ASCE; September 12–14 Orlando, Florida, USA.
   Google Scholar
• Pi Y, Duffield N, Behzadan AH, Lomax T. 2022. Visual recognition for urban traffic data retrieval and analysis in major events using convolutional neural networks. Comput Urban Sci. 2(1):2–16. doi:10.1007/s43762-021-00031-w
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Redmon J, Divvala S, Girshick R, Farhadi A. 2016. You only look once: Unified, real-time object detection. Paper presented at: Proceedings of IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition. IEEE; June 26–July 1, Las Vegas, NV, USA.
   Google Scholar
• Redmon J, Farhadi A. 2018. Yolov3: An incremental improvement. arXiv preprint arXiv:1804.02767.
   Google Scholar
• Ren S, He K, Girshick R, Sun J. 2015. 2015. Faster r-cnn: Towards real-time object detection with region proposal networks. Adv Neural Inf Process Syst. 28:91–99.
   Google Scholar
• Shier R. 2004. Statistics: 2.3: The Mann-Whitney U Test. Math Learn Support Centre. [accessed 2022 May]. https://www.lboro.ac.uk/media/media/schoolanddepartments/mlsc/downloads/2_3_mann_whitney.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Shiranthika C, Premaratne P, Zheng Z, Halloran B. 2019. Realtime computer vision-based accurate vehicle counting and speed estimation for highways. In: International Conference on Intelligent Computing, April 20–21. Tehri, India: Springer
   Google Scholar
• Silverstein C, Schorr J, Hamdar SH. 2016. Work zones versus nonwork zones: risk factors leading to rear-end and sideswipe collisions. J Transp Saf Secur. 8(4):310–326. doi:10.1080/19439962.2015.1036332
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Steinbakk RT, Ulleberg P, Sagberg F, Fostervold KI. 2017. Analysing the influence of visible roadwork activity on drivers’ speed choice at work zones using a video-based experiment. Transp Res Part F Traffic Psychol Behav. 44:53–62. doi:10.1016/j.trf.2016.10.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Steinbakk RT, Ulleberg P, Sagberg F, Fostervold KI. 2019. Effects of roadwork characteristics and drivers’ individual differences on speed preferences in a rural work zone. Accid Anal Prev. 132:105263. doi:10.1016/j.aap.2019.105263
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Summala H, Hietamäki J. 1984. Drivers’ immediate responses to traffic signs. Ergonomics. 27(2):205–216. doi:10.1080/00140138408963478
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vlahogianni E, Karlaftis M. 2011. Temporal aggregation in traffic data: implications for statistical characteristics and model choice. Transp Lett. 3(1):37–49. doi:10.3328/TL.2011.03.01.37-49
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wojke N, Bewley A, Paulus D. 2017. Simple online and realtime tracking with a deep association metric. September 17–20. Beijing, China: IEEE.
   Google Scholar
• Xu S, Wang J, Shou W, Ngo T, Sadick A-M, Wang X. 2021. Computer vision techniques in construction: a critical review. Arch Computat Methods Eng. 28(5):3383–3397. doi:10.1007/s11831-020-09504-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yang H, Ozbay K, Ozturk O, Xie K. 2015. Work zone safety analysis and modeling: a state-of-the-art review. Traffic Inj Prev. 16(4):387–396. doi:10.1080/15389588.2014.948615
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zech WC, Mohan S, Dmochowski J. 2005. Evaluation of rumble strips and police presence as speed control measures in highway work zones. Pract Period Struct Des Constr. 10(4):267–275. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)1084-0680(2005)10:4(267)
   Google Scholar