Identification of evasive manoeuvres in traffic interactions and conflicts

Johnsson, Carl; Laureshyn, Aliaksei · 2022 · Crossref

DOI: 10.55329/erqd8683

archive: archived pipeline: cataloged verified

Get this paper ↗ (DOI — opens at the source; we link to it, we don't host it)

Summary

This paper addresses the limitations of the Traffic Conflicts Technique (TCT), specifically the reliance on brake application as the primary indicator of traffic conflicts. The authors argue that brake-based methods are inadequate because they fail to distinguish conflict severity, ignore non-braking evasive maneuvers (such as acceleration), and are subject to driver variability and mechanical failures. To develop a more reliable method for predicting collisions and measuring hazard severity, the study investigates alternative parameters based on the sequential development of conflict events. The research methodology involved a detailed analysis of actual collision and conflict events recorded via permanent video equipment at a busy intersection in Toronto over a two-year period (October 1975 to December 1978). The study focused primarily on left-turn conflicts involving opposing through vehicles. The authors analyzed 25 collision scenes and 347 conflict events. They proposed seven new measurement parameters to describe different stages of the conflict sequence: Proportion of Stopping Distance (PSD), Gap Time (GT), Encroachment Time (ET), Deceleration Rate (DR), Post Encroachment Time (PET), and Initial Anticipated Post Encroachment Time (IAPE). These parameters were evaluated against criteria including correlation with historical collision data, consistency over time, relation to brake application, ease of measurement, and applicability to other conflict types. The results indicated that no single parameter was perfect, but Gap Time (GT) and Post Encroachment Time (PET) emerged as the most highly evaluated measures. PET showed the highest correlation (0.495) with historical collision data, while GT demonstrated the lowest variance across different days, indicating high consistency. Conversely, PSD and IAPE received the lowest rankings. The study found that while correlations between conflict measures and collision history were statistically low, this was attributed to the limited size of the collision dataset rather than the ineffectiveness of the measures. The authors concluded that GT and PET provide a more practical and explanatory framework for understanding accident occurrence than the conventional brake-light counting method. The significance of this work lies in its challenge to the standard TCT methodology. By shifting focus from binary brake indicators to continuous temporal and spatial measures, the study offers a more nuanced approach to quantifying traffic hazard. The findings suggest that GT and PET are superior tools for identifying the severity of near-miss situations and understanding the sequence of events leading to collisions. This approach allows for better differentiation between minor and severe conflicts, potentially improving the predictive capability of traffic safety assessments and enabling more effective corrective actions at roadway locations.

Provenance

The full processing record for this entry. Every stage of this paper's journey through the pipeline is logged — what ran, with which tool and model, how many attempts it took, and when it last completed.

Summary generated by qwen3.6-27b-prismaquant on 2026-06-26; verification: verified.

Topics

Ranked by relevance to this paper. Hover a topic for its definition.

• driver vru interaction
• driver post crash behavior