ChatGPT is a highly advanced AI language model that has gained widespread popularity. It is trained to understand and generate human language and is used in various applications, including automated customer service, chatbots, and content generation. While it has the potential to offer many benefits, there are also concerns about its potential for misuse, particularly in relation to providing inappropriate or harmful safety-related information. To explore ChatGPT's (specifically version 3.5) capabilities in providing safety-related advice, a multidisciplinary consortium of experts was formed to analyse nine cases across different safety domains: using mobile phones while driving, supervising children around water, crowd management guidelines, precautions to prevent falls in older people, air pollution when exercising, intervening when a colleague is distressed, managing job demands to prevent burnout, protecting personal data in fitness apps, and fatigue when operating heavy machinery. The experts concluded that there is potential for significant risks when using ChatGPT as a source of information and advice for safety-related issues. ChatGPT provided incorrect or potentially harmful statements and emphasised individual responsibility, potentially leading to ecological fallacy. The study highlights the need for caution when using ChatGPT for safety-related information and expert verification, as well as the need for ethical considerations and safeguards to ensure users understand the limitations and receive appropriate advice, especially in low- and middle-income countries. The results of this investigation serve as a reminder that while AI technology continues to advance, caution must be exercised to ensure that its applications do not pose a threat to public safety.@en

Sleepiness is a common human factor among truck drivers resulting from sleep loss or time of day and causing impairment in vigilance, attention, and driving performance. While driver sleepiness may be associated with increased risk on the road, sleepy drivers may drive more cautiously as a result of risk-compensating behaviour. This endogeneity has been overlooked in the previous driver behaviour studies and may provide new insight into the effects of sleepiness on driving performance. In addition, the Karolinska Sleepiness Scale (KSS) has been widely used to quantify sleepiness. However, the KSS is a subjective self-reported measure and is reliant on honest reporting and understanding of the scale. An alternative way of quantifying sleepiness is using drivers’ heart rate and correlating it with their sleepiness. While recent advances in data collection technologies have made it possible to collect heart rate data in real-time and in an unobtrusive way, their application in measuring sleepiness particularly among truck drivers has been unexplored. This study aims to address these gaps and contribute to analytic methods in road safety research by collecting truck drivers’ heart rate data in real-time, measuring sleepiness from those data, and using it in an instrumental variable modelling framework to investigate its effect on driving performance. To this end, a driving simulator experiment was conducted in Belgium and heart rate data were collected for 35 truck drivers via sensors installed on the steering wheel of the simulator. Additional demographic data were collected using a questionnaire before the experiment. An instrumental variable model consisting of a discrete binary logit and a continuous generalized linear model with grouped random parameters and heterogeneity in their means was then developed to study the effects of driver sleepiness on headway. Results indicate that age, years of holding driver licence, road type, type of truck transport, and weekly distance travelled are significantly associated with sleepiness among the participants of this study. Sleepy driving is associated with reduced headway for 30.5% of the drivers and increased headway for the other 69.5%, and night-time shift is associated with such varied effects. These findings indicate that there may be group- or context-specific risk patterns which cannot be explicitly addressed by hours of service regulations and therefore, transport operators, driver trainers and fleet managers should identify and handle such context-specific high risk patterns in order to ensure safe operations.@en

Driver sleepiness and fatigue are important contributors to many transport incidents and significantly increase crash risk. Recently, detection systems have been developed which aim to monitor the state of the driver and detect increasing levels of fatigue. However, there has been less focus on appropriate intervention strategies for drivers once fatigue and sleepiness have been detected. This paper describes the i-DREAMS fatigue intervention strategies, which aim to keep drivers within a safe driving zone. Interventions will be provided both in real-time and post-trip and can be customized to be used with a variety of transport modes. Real-time interventions will measure fatigue through trip duration, and driver sleepiness through heart-rate variability (HRV) information, obtained by means of sensors in the steering wheel or a wearable device, and attributed to Karolinska Sleepiness Score (KSS) bands. Thresholds for warnings will map onto phases of a ‘Safety Tolerance Zone’ and will be dynamic – changing as the driver state and driving situation develops. Post-trip interventions will aggregate data throughout the duration of the drive and aim to provide customized feedback and coping tips related to driver levels of fatigue and sleepiness, to improve driving behavior. Goals and challenges will add a gamified aspect to the post-trip interventions. The next stage of the development of the i-DREAMS fatigue intervention strategy is to test the concept in a series of simulator and field trials. Future research should explore acceptance and compliance of interventions and frequency of alerts.@en

The European Road Safety Decision Support System (roadsafety-dss.eu) is an innovative system providing the available evidence on a broad range of road risks and possible countermeasures. This paper describes the scientific basis of the DSS. The structure underlying the DSS consists of (1) a taxonomy identifying risk factors and measures and linking them to each other, (2) a repository of studies, and (3) synopses summarizing the effects estimated in the literature for each risk factor and measure, and (4) an economic efficiency evaluation instrument (E3-calculator). The DSS is implemented in a modern web-based tool with a highly ergonomic interface, allowing users to get a quick overview or go deeper into the results of single studies according to their own needs.@en

The objective of this paper is the review and comparative assessment of infrastructure related crash risk factors, with the explicit purpose of ranking them based on how detrimental they are towards road safety (i.e. crash risk, frequency and severity). This analysis was carried out within the SafetyCube project, which aimed to identify and quantify the effects of risk factors and measures related to behaviour, infrastructure or vehicles, and integrate the results in an innovative road safety Decision Support System (DSS). The evaluation was conducted by examining studies from the existing literature. These were selected and analysed using a specifically designed common methodology. Infrastructure risk factors were structured in a hierarchical taxonomy of 10 areas with several risk factors in each area (59 specific risk factors in total), examples include: alignment features (e.g. horizontal-vertical alignment deficiencies), cross-section characteristics (e.g. superelevation, lanes, median and shoulder deficiencies), road surface deficiencies, workzones, junction deficiencies (interchange and at-grade) etc. Consultation with infrastructure stakeholders (international organisations, road authorities, etc.) took place in dedicated workshops to identify user needs for the DSS, as well as “hot topics” of particular importance. The following analysis methodology was applied to each infrastructure risk factor: (i) A search for relevant international literature, (ii) Selection of studies on the basis of rigorous criteria, (iii) Analysis of studies in terms of design, methods and limitations, (iv) Synthesis of findings - and meta-analysis, when feasible. In total 243 recent and high quality studies were selected and analysed. Synthesis of results was made through 39 ‘Synopses’ (including 4 original meta-analyses) on individual risk factors or groups of risk factors. This allowed the ranking of infrastructure risk factors into three groups: risky (11 risk factors), probably risky (18 risk factors), and unclear (7 risk factors).

@en