Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 39
39
· Minimum Delay (s): The minimum theoretical pedestrian type (i.e., a crossable gap and a yield) and a range of outcomes
delay in seconds, defined as the time difference between (utilized and non-utilized). Data for a single crossing attempt
when the trial started and when the first yield or crossable are often characterized by scarce data, where only certain
gap was encountered by the pedestrian. events are represented. Once the data are combined for all
· Delay>Min (s): The delay beyond the first opportunity, participants, the analysis reports the average, minimum,
defined as the time difference between first yield or crossable maximum, and standard deviation of performance at each
gap encountered by the pedestrian and the actual crossing crossing location.
initiation. The delay performance measures are measured in a tempo-
ral dimension (in seconds). For those measures, aggregation
The analysis further investigates two parameters that are is again to the level of the single participant at one crossing
intended to describe the efficiency with which a crossing oppor- location. But in addition to the average, minimum, maxi-
tunity is utilized for both gaps and yields: mum, and standard deviation, the analysis further reports the
85th percentile of the estimate. This is common practice for
· Latency (s): The latency is defined as the time between when the analysis of continuous variables in traffic engineering
the last vehicle went through the crosswalk and the time the applications such as delay studies (Institute for Transporta-
pedestrian initiated the crossing. tion Engineers 1994).
· Yield Lost Time (s): The yield lost time (YLT) is defined
as the time between when a driver first yields and the time
Performance Measure Example
the crossing is initiated. Note that in some cases, pedestri-
ans may prefer to cross only after a car has come to a full This section presents an illustrative example of the dif-
stop (stopped yield), and so some inherent yield utilization ferent performance measures used in the analysis, which was
time is expected. previously published in Schroeder and Rouphail (2010).
The example in Figure 14 assumes a crossing attempt by a
Finally, the analysis uses the rate of O&M interventions that single pedestrian who encounters 10 different vehicles at a
represent a measure of pedestrian safety during the crossings. single-lane crossing.
The study participants were at all times accompanied by a Figure 14 shows a time line of a pedestrian encountering
certified O&M specialist who was directed to stop the partic- 10 hypothetical vehicle events. The time line proceeds from
ipants if the crossing decision would have resulted in undue left to right, from the start of the trial until the last vehicle
risk to pedestrian and/or driver. The resulting rate of O&M that interacted with the pedestrian crossed the plane of the
interventions is defined as follows: crosswalk. Of the 10 vehicles, vehicles 2, 4, 7, and 8 yielded
to the pedestrian, but none of these yields were utilized.
· Intervention rate (%): The number of times the O&M Vehicles 1, 3, 5, 6, 8, and 9 didn't yield even though a pedes-
specialist intervened for a particular participant divided by trian was waiting at the crosswalk. No yield information is
the total number of lanes crossed for a particular condi- available for vehicle 10 since the pedestrian had already walked
tion. For example, one intervention over a set of eight lane across by the time it crossed the plane of the crosswalk. Con-
crossings at the roundabout entry corresponds to an inter- sequently, the variable P(Yield) is calculated from 4 yields
vention rate of 12.5%. divided by a total of 9 drivers that could have yielded and
equals 44.4%. On the contrary, the variable P(Y_ENC) = 40%
Most of the performance measures above are expressed as is calculated by dividing 4 yields by a total of 10 vehicles
percentages, which could also be interpreted as a probability encountered in the trial.
of a certain event taking place or a rate of occurrence of that The temporal separation between vehicles 23, 56, and
event. For all percentage measures, the level of aggregation is 910 constitute 3 crossable gaps, the last of which was utilized
on the level of the individual participant for all crossings by by the pedestrians. The gap from the start of the trial to vehi-
that participant at a particular location. For example, a pedes- cle 1 and the gaps between vehicles 45 and 89 were below the
trian who crosses the entry leg of a roundabout four times will crossable gap threshold. The measure P(CG) = 50.0% is calcu-
have an average rate of yield encounters calculated from those lated by dividing 3 crossable gaps by 6 total gaps encountered.
four crossing attempts. The same pedestrian will have a dif- P(CG_ENC) = 30.0% is calculated by dividing 3 crossable gaps
ferent rate of yield encounters for the exit leg crossing and by a total of 10 events.
also different entry and exit leg percentages for any additional The advantage of the P(Y_ENC) and P(CG_ENC) mea-
approaches at the roundabout included in the study. The sures is that they have the same denominator (total number of
aggregation to the leg per participant level is necessary to encounters) and are thus additive. This ensures a consistent
ensure that the data point includes at least one of each event and objective definition of events. In the NCHRP Project 3-78A
