Volume List  / Volume 6 (3)

Article

PREDICTING STATE OF TRAFFIC SIGNS USING LOGISTIC REGRESSION

DOI: 10.7708/ijtte.2016.6(3).04


6 / 3 / 280-288 Pages

Author(s)

Dario Babić - Faculty of Transport and Traffic Science, Vukelićeva 4, 10000 Zagreb, Croatia -

Anđelko Ščukanec - Faculty of Transport and Traffic Science, Vukelićeva 4, 10000 Zagreb, Croatia -

Mario Fiolić - Faculty of Transport and Traffic Science, Vukelićeva 4, 10000 Zagreb, Croatia -


Abstract

Traffic signs as part of the overall traffic signalization system convey a message to road users using shapes, colours, text and symbols. They inform road users about regulations, warnings, directions, and guidance in traffic systems, in order to ensure safe traffic flow. In conditions of low visibility drivers receive less visual information in traffic which makes the perception of the surroundings, and thus the driving, significantly more difficult. In order to overcome the mentioned problems traffic signs must have satisfactory retroreflection properties and be properly positioned and maintained. Given the number of traffic signs on the roads, it is necessary to optimize their maintenance activities. The aim of this study is to develop a model for predicting the state of traffic signs regarding their retroreflective values based on their age. The study included 21,467 traffic signs on 30 state roads throughout the Republic of Croatia. Linear models for predicting state of signs were developed using binary logistic regression for each class of retroreflective material. Even though the models very accurately predict when the signs meet minimal prescribed retroreflection values for all the three classes of retroreflective material, they have certain downsides when predicting when the signs are not valid, i.e. do not meet minimal prescribed retroreflection values. Although the developed models did not show satisfactory accuracy, they represent unique prediction models of traffic signs functional service life, enabling prediction without conducting previous retroreflection measurements which, considering the number of in-service traffic signs, thus enables the optimization of the traffic signs maintenance system.


Download Article

Number of downloads: 1446


References:

Austin, L.R.; Schultz, J.R. 2009. Guide to retroreflection safety principles and retroreflective measurements. Available from Internet: http://www.gamma-sci.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/Retroreflectivity-Guide-RoadVista.pdf.

 

Bischoff, A.L.; Bullock, D.M. 2002. Sign retroreflectivity study. Indiana Department of Transportation, Indianapolis, USA. 111 p. Report No. FHWA/IN/JTRP-2002/22.

 

Black, K.L. et al. 1992. Service life of retroreflective signs. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Washington D.C., USA. 112 p. Report No. FHWA-RD-90-101.

 

Brimley, B.; Carlson, P. 2013. The current state of research on the long-term deterioration of traffic signs. Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington D.C., USA. 14 p. Paper No. 13-0033.

 

Carlson, P.J.; Higgins, L.; Ré, J. 2011. Research and recommendations for a statewide sign retroreflectivity maintenance program. Texas Department of Transportation, Texas, USA. 108 p. Report No. FHWA/TX-12/0-6408-1.

 

EN 12899-1: Fixed, vertical road traffic signs - Part 1: Permanent signs, 2008.

 

Fleyeh, H.; Roch, J. 2013. Benchmark evaluation of hog descriptors as features for classification of traffic signs, International Journal for Traffic and Transport Engineering, 3(4): 448-464.

 

Jamson, S.L.; Tate, F.N.; Jamson, A.H. 2005. Evaluating the effects of bilingual traffic signs on driver performance and safety, Ergonomics, 48(15): 1734-1748.

 

Kipp, W.M.E.; Fitch, J.M.V. 2009. Evaluation of measuring methods for traffic sign retroreflectivity. Vermont Agency of Transportation, Montpelier, USA. 56 p. Report No. 2009-8.

 

Kirk, A.R.; Hunt, E.A.; Brooks, E.W. 2001. Factors affecting sign retroreflectivity. Oregon Department of Transportation, Salem, USA. 27 p. Report No. OR-RD-01-09.

 

Macdonald, W.A.; Hoffmann, E.R. 1991. Drivers' awareness of traffic sign information, Ergonomics, 34(5): 585-612.

 

Pike, A.M.; Carlson, P.J. 2014. Evaluation of sign sheeting service life in Wyoming. Paper presented at the Transportation Research Board 93rd Annual Meeting, Washington D.C., USA. Paper Number: 14-0758, January 12-16.

 

Preston, H. et al. 2014. Traffic sign life expectancy. Minnesota Department of Transportation, Minnesota, USA. 45 p. Report No. 2014-20.

 

Rasdorf, W.J. et al. 2006. Designing an efficient nighttime sign inspection procedure to ensure motorist safety. North Carolina Department of Transportation, Raleigh, USA. 273 p. Report No. FHWA/NC/2006-08.

 

Summala, H.; Hietamäki, J. 1984. Drivers' immediate responses to traffic signs, Ergonomics, 27(2): 205-2016.

 

Sun, L. et al. 2011. Simulation analysis on driving behavior during traffic sign recognition, International Journal of Computational Intelligence Systems, 4(3): 353-360.

 

Tabachnick, B.G.; Fidell, L.S. 2013. Using multivariate statistics: 6th Edition. Pearson, UK. 1024 p. ISBN: 9780205849574.

 

Zakowska, L. 1995. Perception and recognition of traffic signs in relation to drivers characteristics and safety – a case study in Poland. Available from Internet: http://www.ictct.org/migrated_2014/ictct_document_nr_226_Zakowska.pdf.