Introducing roadside hazard severity indicator based on evidential reasoning approach

Safety experts have, in recent years, been attentive to roadside accident severity and occurrence. Hitherto, to prioritize road segment hazardousness, there have been little efforts to quantify a well defined indicator. In this regard, the existing indicators are usually very plain and the overall configuration of roadside is rated by experts with an exact number describing its condition. Hence, the uncertainties which come with the subjective judgments cannot be regarded as of any substance. This research contribution therefore presents a procedure to assess the road safety (roadside safety indicator) by means of the evidential reasoning (ER) approach. The betterment of ER as opposed to the available procedures for roadside safety assessment is that the proposed approach makes allowance for the uncertainties which may arise from individual judgments. Additionally, when there is a dearth of evidence concerning factors which affect roadside hazardousness severity to collate several roadside segments, this procedure will offer the benefits of utilizing the maximum/minimum utility function. With the aid of the drawn indicator, organizations and agencies responsible for ensuring road safety can reach more flexible decisions to set in-place uncertain planning and road segments priorities. This indicator can also be utilized as a variable to include roadside conditions in crash severity prediction models. A field case study has also been carried out in an attempt to follow and validate the proposed approach which is based on the run-off accident history for a sample road segments. The crash data confirm the suggested indicator.

[1]  Pratyush Sen,et al.  Multiple-criteria Decision-making in Design Selection and Synthesis , 1995 .

[2]  Ping-Teng Chang,et al.  The fuzzy Delphi method via fuzzy statistics and membership function fitting and an application to the human resources , 2000, Fuzzy Sets Syst..

[3]  Jian-Bo Yang,et al.  Rule and utility based evidential reasoning approach for multiattribute decision analysis under uncertainties , 2001, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[4]  Daniel S. Turner,et al.  Prediction of Bridge Accident Rates , 1984 .

[5]  E Ayati,et al.  DECISION AID FOR ALLOCATION OF TRANSPORTATION FUNDS TO ROADSIDE SAFETY ENHANCEMENT , 2007 .

[6]  C Zegeer,et al.  SAFETY EFFECTS OF CROSS-SECTION DESIGN FOR TWO-LANE ROADS - VOLUME II - APPENDIXES - FINAL REPORT , 1987 .

[7]  Jian-Bo Yang,et al.  Multi-person and multi-attribute design evaluations using evidential reasoning based on subjective safety and cost analyses , 1996 .

[8]  J C Fox,et al.  An in-depth study of accidents involving collisions with utility poles. , 1987, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[9]  Jian-Bo Yang,et al.  A General Multi-Level Evaluation Process for Hybrid MADM With Uncertainty , 1994, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. Syst..

[10]  I. Curtis,et al.  Valuing ecosystem goods and services: a new approach using a surrogate market and the combination of a multiple criteria analysis and a Delphi panel to assign weights to the attributes , 2004 .

[11]  Jian-Bo Yang,et al.  On the evidential reasoning algorithm for multiple attribute decision analysis under uncertainty , 2002, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. Part A.

[12]  Rafael Jurado-Piña,et al.  Empirical calibration of a roadside hazardousness index for Spanish two-lane rural roads. , 2010, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[13]  M. Hadi,et al.  ESTIMATING SAFETY EFFECTS OF CROSS-SECTION DESIGN FOR VARIOUS HIGHWAY TYPES USING NEGATIVE BINOMIAL REGRESSION , 1995 .

[14]  Tarek Sayed,et al.  Development of a Road Safety Risk Index , 2002 .

[15]  Wayne K. Talley,et al.  Stability and agreement criteria for the termination of Delphi studies , 1979 .

[16]  M H Ray,et al.  Impact conditions in side-impact collisions with fixed roadside objects. , 1999, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[17]  S. Cafiso,et al.  Identification of Hazard Location and Ranking of Measures to Improve Safety on Local Rural Roads , 2007 .

[18]  R Elvik,et al.  Can injury prevention efforts go too far? Reflections on some possible implications of Vision Zero for road accident fatalities. , 1999, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[19]  Salvatore Cafiso,et al.  Safety Index for Evaluation of Two-Lane Rural Highways , 2007 .

[20]  Alfonso Montella Safety reviews of existing roads: Quantitative safety assessment methodology , 2005 .

[21]  M Safaarzadeh,et al.  IDENTIFYING THE EFFECTIVE CRITERIA FOR PRIORITIZING ACCIDENT BLACK-SPOTS AND THEIR MEASURE OF IMPORTANCE , 2008 .

[22]  John Dixon,et al.  An exploration of the use of simple statistics to measure consensus and stability in Delphi studies , 2007, BMC medical research methodology.

[23]  J R Stewart,et al.  Severity Indexes for Roadside Objects , 1996 .

[24]  Fred Mannering,et al.  Impact of roadside features on the frequency and severity of run-off-roadway accidents: an empirical analysis. , 2002, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[25]  T. Saaty,et al.  The Analytic Hierarchy Process , 1985 .

[26]  Salvatore Cafiso,et al.  Development of comprehensive accident models for two-lane rural highways using exposure, geometry, consistency and context variables. , 2010, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[27]  M. Singh,et al.  An Evidential Reasoning Approach for Multiple-Attribute Decision Making with Uncertainty , 1994, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. Syst..

[28]  C Zegeer,et al.  SAFETY RELATIONSHIPS ASSOCIATED WITH CROSS-SECTIONAL ROADWAY ELEMENTS , 1995 .

[29]  Ying-Ming Wang,et al.  Evidential reasoning approach for bridge condition assessment , 2008, Expert Syst. Appl..

[30]  Kenneth S Opiela,et al.  STRATEGIES FOR IMPROVING ROADSIDE SAFETY , 1998 .

[31]  M. Aickin,et al.  Researching complementary and alternative treatments – the gatekeepers are not at home , 2007, BMC Medical Research Methodology.

[32]  Esmaeel Ayati,et al.  Safety and cost-effectiveness of clear zones in Iran , 2007 .

[33]  Tetsuya Murai,et al.  Multiple-attribute decision making under uncertainty: the evidential reasoning approach revisited , 2006, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics - Part A: Systems and Humans.