Driving Safety Risk Prediction Using Cost-Sensitive With Nonnegativity-Constrained Autoencoders Based on Imbalanced Naturalistic Driving Data

A large number of studies have shown that most vehicle collisions are caused by drivers’ abnormal operations. To ensure the safety of all people on the road network as much as possible, it is crucial to be able to predict the drivers’ driving safety risks in real time. In this paper, we propose a novel cost-sensitive <inline-formula> <tex-math notation="LaTeX">$L1/L2$ </tex-math></inline-formula>-nonnegativity-constrained deep autoencoder network for driving safety risk prediction. Unfortunately, with existing research methods, the size of the sliding time window is too large, the feature extraction is relatively subjective, and class imbalances occur, which leads to low identification accuracy, long prediction times, and poor applicability. We first propose using a three-layer <inline-formula> <tex-math notation="LaTeX">$L1/L2$ </tex-math></inline-formula>-nonnegativity-constrained autoencoder to adaptively search the optimal size of the sliding window and then construct a deep <inline-formula> <tex-math notation="LaTeX">$L1/L2$ </tex-math></inline-formula>-nonnegativity-constrained autoencoder network to automatically extract the hidden features of the driving behaviors. Finally, we build a new <inline-formula> <tex-math notation="LaTeX">$L1/L2$ </tex-math></inline-formula>-nonnegativity-constrained focal loss classifier to predict the driving behaviors under different safety risk levels. The results from the public 100-Car naturalistic driving study dataset indicate that our method can effectively find the optimal window size, reduce the data volume and reconstruction error, and extract more distinctive features. Furthermore, this method effectively curbs the class imbalance, improves the driving safety risk prediction performance, reduces overfitting, shortens the prediction time, and improves the timeliness.

[1]  Thomas A. Dingus,et al.  The 100-Car Naturalistic Driving Study Phase II – Results of the 100-Car Field Experiment , 2006 .

[2]  Yanru Zhang,et al.  Using an ARIMA-GARCH Modeling Approach to Improve Subway Short-Term Ridership Forecasting Accounting for Dynamic Volatility , 2018, IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems.

[3]  Tong Li,et al.  GMM and CNN Hybrid Method for Short Utterance Speaker Recognition , 2018, IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics.

[4]  Heng Tao Shen,et al.  Video Captioning With Attention-Based LSTM and Semantic Consistency , 2017, IEEE Transactions on Multimedia.

[5]  Hwasoo Yeo,et al.  Improvement of Search Strategy With K-Nearest Neighbors Approach for Traffic State Prediction , 2016, IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems.

[6]  Nuno Vasconcelos,et al.  Cost-Sensitive Support Vector Machines , 2012, Neurocomputing.

[7]  Jacek M. Zurada,et al.  Visualizing and Understanding Nonnegativity Constrained Sparse Autoencoder in Deep Learning , 2016, ICAISC.

[8]  Yoshua Bengio,et al.  Extracting and composing robust features with denoising autoencoders , 2008, ICML '08.

[9]  Paolo Santi,et al.  The Car as an Ambient Sensing Platform , 2017, Proc. IEEE.

[10]  Kazuya Takeda,et al.  A Study of Driver Behavior Under Potential Threats in Vehicle Traffic , 2009, IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems.

[11]  J R Treat,et al.  TRI-LEVEL STUDY OF THE CAUSES OF TRAFFIC ACCIDENTS: FINAL REPORT , 1979 .

[12]  Philippe Baecke,et al.  The value of vehicle telematics data in insurance risk selection processes , 2017, Decis. Support Syst..

[13]  Thomas A. Dingus,et al.  The 100-Car Naturalistic Driving Study: A Descriptive Analysis of Light Vehicle-Heavy Vehicle Interactions from the Light Vehicle Driver's Perspective , 2006 .

[14]  George Yannis,et al.  Innovative motor insurance schemes: A review of current practices and emerging challenges. , 2017, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[15]  Dong Ni,et al.  A Deep Convolutional Neural Network-Based Framework for Automatic Fetal Facial Standard Plane Recognition , 2018, IEEE Journal of Biomedical and Health Informatics.

[16]  Feng Guo,et al.  Individual driver risk assessment using naturalistic driving data. , 2013, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[17]  Nalini Ravishanker,et al.  Bayesian estimation of hourly exposure functions by crash type and time of day. , 2006, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[18]  Geoffrey E. Hinton,et al.  Autoencoders, Minimum Description Length and Helmholtz Free Energy , 1993, NIPS.

[19]  Hongxin Hu,et al.  Cyberbullying Detection with a Pronunciation Based Convolutional Neural Network , 2016, 2016 15th IEEE International Conference on Machine Learning and Applications (ICMLA).

[20]  Jie Chen,et al.  Cross-covariance regularized autoencoders for nonredundant sparse feature representation , 2018, Neurocomputing.

[21]  Li Pan,et al.  Predicting Short-Term Traffic Flow by Long Short-Term Memory Recurrent Neural Network , 2015, 2015 IEEE International Conference on Smart City/SocialCom/SustainCom (SmartCity).

[22]  J C Fell,et al.  THE RELATIVE FREQUENCY OF UNSAFE DRIVING ACTS IN SERIOUS TRAFFIC CRASHES - SUMMARY TECHNICAL REPORT , 2000 .

[23]  Fabio Martinelli,et al.  Cyber-insurance survey , 2017, Comput. Sci. Rev..

[24]  Yoshiko Kojima,et al.  A Multimodal ADAS System for Unmarked Urban Scenarios Based on Road Context Understanding , 2015, IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems.

[25]  Thomas A. Dingus,et al.  An overview of the 100-car naturalistic study and findings , 2005 .

[26]  Jianqiang Wang,et al.  Driving risk assessment using near-crash database through data mining of tree-based model. , 2015, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[27]  Haibo He,et al.  Learning from Imbalanced Data , 2009, IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering.

[28]  Mark Stevenson,et al.  Identifying behavioural change among drivers using Long Short-Term Memory recurrent neural networks , 2018 .

[29]  M Mackay,et al.  Age and gender effects on injury outcome for restrained occupants in frontal crashes: a comparison of UK and US data bases. , 2000, Annual proceedings. Association for the Advancement of Automotive Medicine.

[30]  Yiyang Bian,et al.  Good drivers pay less: A study of usage-based vehicle insurance models , 2018 .

[31]  Diva Eensoo,et al.  Preventing risky driving: A novel and efficient brief intervention focusing on acknowledgement of personal risk factors. , 2013, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[32]  Charles E. Dickerson,et al.  Coordinated control architecture for motion management in ADAS systems , 2018, IEEE/CAA Journal of Automatica Sinica.

[33]  Marco Dozza,et al.  How does glance behavior influence crash and injury risk? A ‘what-if’ counterfactual simulation using crashes and near-crashes from SHRP2 , 2015 .

[34]  Pat Langley,et al.  Estimating Continuous Distributions in Bayesian Classifiers , 1995, UAI.

[35]  David Masko,et al.  The Impact of Imbalanced Training Data for Convolutional Neural Networks , 2015 .

[36]  Thomas A. Dingus,et al.  Near Crashes as Crash Surrogate for Naturalistic Driving Studies , 2010 .

[37]  Yangyu Fan,et al.  Automatic Modulation Classification Using Deep Learning Based on Sparse Autoencoders With Nonnegativity Constraints , 2017, IEEE Signal Processing Letters.

[38]  Zhi-Hua Zhou,et al.  Ieee Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering 1 Training Cost-sensitive Neural Networks with Methods Addressing the Class Imbalance Problem , 2022 .

[39]  Suleyman S. Kozat,et al.  Online Training of LSTM Networks in Distributed Systems for Variable Length Data Sequences , 2017, IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks and Learning Systems.

[40]  G. Maycock,et al.  SPEED, SPEED LIMITS AND ACCIDENTS , 1994 .

[41]  Huy Kang Kim,et al.  Know your master: Driver profiling-based anti-theft method , 2016, 2016 14th Annual Conference on Privacy, Security and Trust (PST).

[42]  Thomas A. Dingus,et al.  Design of the In-Vehicle Driving Behavior and Crash Risk Study: In Support of the SHRP 2 Naturalistic Driving Study , 2011 .

[43]  Subhransu Maji,et al.  Classification using intersection kernel support vector machines is efficient , 2008, 2008 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition.

[44]  Frédéric Thiesse,et al.  Evaluation and aggregation of pay-as-you-drive insurance rate factors: A classification analysis approach , 2013, Decis. Support Syst..

[45]  Kaiming He,et al.  Focal Loss for Dense Object Detection , 2017, 2017 IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV).

[46]  Petros A. Ioannou,et al.  Personalized Driver/Vehicle Lane Change Models for ADAS , 2015, IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology.

[47]  J C Fell,et al.  THE RELATIVE FREQUENCY OF UNSAFE DRIVING ACTS IN SERIOUS TRAFFIC CRASHES - SUMMARY TECHNICAL REPORT , 2001 .

[48]  Richa Singh,et al.  Group sparse autoencoder , 2017, Image Vis. Comput..

[49]  Takashi Imamura,et al.  A study of analysis method for driver features extraction , 2008, 2008 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man and Cybernetics.

[50]  Tadahiro Taniguchi,et al.  Visualization of Driving Behavior Based on Hidden Feature Extraction by Using Deep Learning , 2017, IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems.

[51]  Dot Hs An Analysis of Driver Inattention Using a Case-Crossover Approach On 100-Car Data: Final Report , 2010 .

[52]  Hiroshi Ohno,et al.  Linear guided autoencoder: Representation learning with linearity , 2017, Appl. Soft Comput..

[53]  James R. Sayer,et al.  Automotive Collision Avoidance System Field Operational Test Report: Methodology and Results Appendices , 2005 .

[54]  Jeremy D Sudweeks,et al.  An Analysis of Driver Inattention Using a Case-Crossover Approach On 100-Car Data: Final Report , 2010 .

[55]  Shanthi Ameratunga,et al.  Risky driving habits and motor vehicle driver injury. , 2005, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[56]  Thomas A. Dingus,et al.  The Impact of Driver Inattention on Near-Crash/Crash Risk: An Analysis Using the 100-Car Naturalistic Driving Study Data , 2006 .

[57]  Tamitza Toroyan,et al.  Global status report on road safety , 2009, Injury Prevention.

[58]  Jun Yu,et al.  Multitask Autoencoder Model for Recovering Human Poses , 2018, IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics.

[59]  Jacek M. Zurada,et al.  Building Efficient ConvNets using Redundant Feature Pruning , 2018, ArXiv.

[60]  Daniel Blower,et al.  The large truck crash causation study , 2002 .

[61]  Yang Liu,et al.  PCNN: Deep Convolutional Networks for Short-Term Traffic Congestion Prediction , 2018, IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems.

[62]  Fred L. Mannering,et al.  The statistical analysis of crash-frequency data: A review and assessment of methodological alternatives , 2010 .

[63]  Jacek M. Zurada,et al.  Learning Understandable Neural Networks With Nonnegative Weight Constraints , 2015, IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks and Learning Systems.

[64]  Meng Wang,et al.  Multimodal Deep Autoencoder for Human Pose Recovery , 2015, IEEE Transactions on Image Processing.

[65]  Bin Hu,et al.  Resting-State Whole-Brain Functional Connectivity Networks for MCI Classification Using L2-Regularized Logistic Regression , 2015, IEEE Transactions on NanoBioscience.

[66]  Mohsen Jafari,et al.  A Data-Driven Approach for Driving Safety Risk Prediction Using Driver Behavior and Roadway Information Data , 2018, IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems.

[67]  Linda Ng Boyle,et al.  Differences in Off-Road Glances: Effects on Young Drivers’ Performance , 2010 .

[68]  Kenneth L Campbell The SHRP 2 Naturalistic Driving Study: Addressing Driver Performance and Behavior in Traffic Safety , 2012 .

[69]  Yee Whye Teh,et al.  A Fast Learning Algorithm for Deep Belief Nets , 2006, Neural Computation.

[70]  Paolo Santi,et al.  Driving Behavior Analysis through CAN Bus Data in an Uncontrolled Environment , 2017, IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems.

[71]  Yifei Yuan,et al.  A Bayesian Network model for contextual versus non-contextual driving behavior assessment , 2017 .

[72]  Arun Kumar Sangaiah,et al.  Human behavior characterization for driving style recognition in vehicle system , 2020, Comput. Electr. Eng..

[73]  Jacek M. Zurada,et al.  Clustering of receptive fields in Autoencoders , 2016, 2016 International Joint Conference on Neural Networks (IJCNN).

[74]  Geoffrey E. Hinton,et al.  ImageNet classification with deep convolutional neural networks , 2012, Commun. ACM.

[75]  Leo Guelman,et al.  Gradient boosting trees for auto insurance loss cost modeling and prediction , 2012, Expert Syst. Appl..

[76]  Li Li,et al.  Risky Driver Recognition Based on Vehicle Speed Time Series , 2018, IEEE Transactions on Human-Machine Systems.

[77]  Jacek M. Zurada,et al.  Deep Learning of Part-Based Representation of Data Using Sparse Autoencoders With Nonnegativity Constraints , 2016, IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks and Learning Systems.

[78]  Toshihiro Wakita,et al.  On the Use of Stochastic Driver Behavior Model in Lane Departure Warning , 2011, IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems.

[79]  Jacek M. Zurada,et al.  Nonredundant sparse feature extraction using autoencoders with receptive fields clustering , 2017, Neural Networks.

[80]  Jonathan P. How,et al.  Driver Behavior Classification at Intersections and Validation on Large Naturalistic Data Set , 2012, IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems.