Exploring the viability of surrogate safety measures based on smartphone data for the safety assessment and screening of urban road street segments

Hamid Marwi; Mehdi Fallah Tafti; Mojtaba Rajabi-Bahaabadi

doi:10.61089/aot2025.m4cf8t40

Authors

Hamid Marwi Department of Civil Engineering, Yazd University, Yazd, Iran Author https://orcid.org/0009-0005-9937-7901
Mehdi Fallah Tafti Department of Civil Engineering, Yazd University, Yazd, Iran Author https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6844-3316
Mojtaba Rajabi-Bahaabadi Department of Civil Engineering, Yazd University, Yazd, Iran Author https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1392-5729

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.61089/aot2025.m4cf8t40

Keywords:

Black Spots, Surrogate Road Safety Measures, Accident Prediction Models, Smartphone Data

Abstract

The focus of traffic safety research has recently shifted from reactive to proactive safety management approaches. In reactive approaches, historical crash data is used to identify accident-prone locations or black spots. However, this approach is inherently reactive, focusing on accidents that have already occurred, requiring several years of accident data. Recently, surrogate safety measures have been adopted as a proactive alternative for identifying black spots. Nowadays, the widespread use of smartphones equipped with GPS systems makes it possible to utilize mobile GPS data to identify accident-prone locations. In this study, GPS-derived surrogate safety measures extracted from smartphone data are used to predict the frequency of potential accident incidences on road segments. On this basis, several Poisson-based statistical models and Artificial Neural Network (ANN) models were developed based on the data collected by smartphones on two carriageways of a long arterial street in Mashhad, Iran. GPS trajectory data, including vehicle speed, acceleration, and location, were collected using a GPS data recorder application installed on the smartphones of drivers and passengers traveling along the carriageway. The results indicated that both the Poisson-based and ANN models can predict crash frequency with reasonable accuracy. However, the ANN model, comprising surrogate speed and acceleration-related safety measures, demonstrated slightly better performance than Poisson-based regression models. The models were then successfully tested for their ability to identify accident-prone segments. Our findings indicated that data obtained from smartphones can be used as surrogate measures for assessing road safety and ranking accident-prone segments along urban roads.

References

1. Ahmadinejad, M., Afandizadeh Zargari, S., & Jalalkamali, R. (2017). Are deceleration numbers a suitable index for road safety? Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers - Transport, 171(5), 247-252. https://doi.org/10.1680/jtran.16.00117.

2. Alhajyaseen, W. K. (2015). The integration of conflict probability and severity for the safety assessment of intersections. Arabian Journal for Science and Engineering, 40, 421-430, https://doi.org/10.1007/s13369-014-1553-1.

3. Ambros, J., Elgner, J., Valentova, V., Bąk, R., & Kieć, M. (2024). Proactive safety assessment of urban through-roads based on GPS data. Archives of Transport, 69, https://doi.org/10.61089/aot2024.gpa7v104.

4. Astarita, V., Guido, G., Vitale, A., & Giofré, V. (2012). A new microsimulation model for the evaluation of traffic safety performances, http://hdl.handle.net/10077/6117.

5. Bagdadi, O. (2013). Estimation of the severity of safety critical events. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 50, 167-174, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2012.04.007.

6. Choong, C. E., Ibrahim, S., & El-Shafie, A. (2020). Artificial Neural Network (ANN) model development for predicting just suspension speed in solid-liquid mixing system. Flow Measurement and Instrumentation, 71, 101689,

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.flowmeasinst.2019.101689.

7. Cunto, F. (2008). Assessing safety performance of transportation systems using microscopic simulation, Ph.D. thesis, Dept. of Civil Engineering, Waterloo, Canada, http://hdl.handle.net/10012/4111.

8. Darawade, K., Karmare, P., Kothmire, S., & Panchal, N. (2016). Estimation of road surface roughness condition from android smartphone sensors. International Journal of Recent Trends in Engineering & Research, 2(3), 339-346, https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.49698.

9. Deliali, A., Ziakopoulos, A., Dragomanovits, A., Handanos, I., Karadimas, C., Kostoulas, G., Frantzola, E. K., & Yannis, G. (2023). Establishing the relationship between crashes and unsafe driver behaviors in motorway segments. Transportation research procedia, 72, 1357-1363.

10. Hayward, J. (1971). Near misses as a measure of safety at urban intersections. Pennsylvania Transportation and Traffic Safety Center.

11. https://www.bumprecorder.com.

12. Khadka, A., Parkin, J., Pilkington, P., Joshi, S. K., & Mytton, J. (2022). Completeness of police reporting of traffic crashes in Nepal: Evaluation using a community crash recording system. Traffic injury prevention, 23(2), 79-84, https://doi.org/10.1080/15389588.2021.2012766.

13. Khanal, M., & Edelmann, N. (2023). Application of connected vehicle data to assess safety on roadways. Eng, 4(1), 259-275, https://doi.org/10.3390/eng4010015.

14. Lee, T., & Rouphail, N. (2024). Enhanced crash frequency models using surrogate safety measures from connected vehicle fleet. Transportation research record, 2678(5), 463-478, https://doi.org/10.1177/03611981231189733.

15. Liu, L., Racz, D., Vaillancourt, K., Michelman, J., Barnes, M., Mellem, S., Eastham, P., Green, B., Armstrong, C., & Bal, R. (2023). Smartphone-based hard-braking event detection at scale for road safety services. Transportation research part C: emerging technologies, 146, 103949, https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2202.01934.

16. Lowe, M. D. (2007). Cars, Their Problems, and the Future, in R. L. Kemp, ed., Cities and Cars: A Handbook of Best Practices (Jefferson, NC: McFarland) 221–226.

17. Nadimi, N., Fathipour, H., & Sheykhfard, A. (2025). Assessing safety in horizontal curves using surrogate safety measures and machine learning. Scientific Reports, 15(1), 12384, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-97384-7.

18. Nikolaou, D., Dragomanovits, A., Ziakopoulos, A., Deliali, A., Handanos, I., Karadimas, C., Kostoulas, G., Frantzola, E. K., & Yannis, G. (2023). Exploiting surrogate safety measures and road design characteristics towards crash investigations in motorway segments. Infrastructures, 8(3), 40, https://doi.org/10.3390/infrastructures8030040.

19. Nikolaou, D., Ziakopoulos, A., Kontaxi, A., Theofilatos, A., & Yannis, G. (2025). Spatial analysis of telematics-based surrogate safety measures. Journal of Safety Research, 92, 98-108. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsr.2024.09.012

20. Nikolaou, D., Ziakopoulos, A., & Yannis, G. (2023). A review of surrogate safety measures uses in historical crash investigations. Sustainability, 15(9), 7580, https://doi.org/10.3390/su15097580.

21. Ozbay, K., Yang, H., Bartin, B., & Mudigonda, S. (2008). Derivation and validation of new simulation-based surrogate safety measure. Transportation research record, 2083(1), 105-113 https://doi.org/10.3141/2083-12.

22. Rahman, M. S., Abdel-Aty, M., Wang, L., & Lee, J. (2018). Understanding the highway safety benefits of different approaches of connected vehicles in reduced visibility conditions. Transportation research record, 2672(19), 91-101, https://doi.org/10.1177/0361198118776113.

23. Shafabakhsh, G., & Sajed, Y. (2022). Identification methods of accident hotspots and providing a model for evaluating the number and severity of accidents on roadways. International journal of transportation engineering, 10(1), 865-875, https://doi.org/10.22119/ijte.2022.170379.1458.

24. Shelby, S. G. (2011). Delta-V as a measure of traffic conflict severity. Transportation Research Board 90th Annual Meeting, Washington, USA. https://trid.trb.org/View/1093469.

25. Stipancic, J., Miranda-Moreno, L., & Saunier, N. (2018). Vehicle manoeuvers as surrogate safety measures: Extracting data from the gps-enabled smartphones of regular drivers. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 115, 160-169, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2018.03.005.

26. Stipancic, J., Miranda-Moreno, L., Saunier, N., & Labbe, A. (2019). Network screening for large urban road networks: Using GPS data and surrogate measures to model crash frequency and severity. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 125, 290-301, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2019.02.016.

27. Stipancic, J., Racine, E. B., Labbe, A., Saunier, N., & Miranda-Moreno, L. (2021). Massive GNSS data for road safety analysis: Comparing crash models for several Canadian cities and data sources. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 159, 106232. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2021.106232

28. Strauss, J., Zangenehpour, S., Miranda-Moreno, L. F., & Saunier, N. (2017). Cyclist deceleration rate as surrogate safety measure in Montreal using smartphone GPS data. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 99, 287-296. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2016.11.019

29. Übeyli, E. D. (2007). Implementing automated diagnostic systems for breast cancer detection. Expert systems with Applications, 33(4), 1054-1062, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2006.08.0.

30. Vogel, K. (2003). A comparison of headway and time to collision as safety indicators. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 35(3), 427-433, https://doi.org/10.1016/s0001-4575(02)00022-2.

31. Wang, C., Xie, Y., Huang, H., & Liu, P. (2021). A review of surrogate safety measures and their applications in connected and automated vehicles safety modeling. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 157, 106157, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2021.106157.

32. Wang, W., Zhang, L., Yan, B., & Cheng, Y. (2025). Development of a Surrogate Safety Measure for Evaluating Rear-End Collision Risk Perception. Transportation research record, https://doi.org/10.1177/03611981241311574.

33. WHO, W. H. O. (2023). Global status report on road safety, ISBN: 9789240086517, 924008651X.

34. Xie, K., Yang, D., Ozbay, K., & Yang, H. (2019). Use of real-world connected vehicle data in identifying high-risk locations based on a new surrogate safety measure. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 125, 311-319, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2018.07.002.

35. Xu, Y., Ye, W., Xie, Y., & Wang, C. (2024). A two-dimensional surrogate safety measure based on fuzzy logic model. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 199, https://doi.org/107529, 10.1016/j.aap.2024.107529.

36. Zhao, X., Carling, K., & Håkansson, J. (2017). An evaluation of the reliability of GPS-based transportation data. IAC (International Academic Conference on Transport, Logistics, Tourism and Sport Science) in Vienna November 24-25.

37. Ziakopoulos, A. (2024). Analysis of harsh braking and harsh acceleration occurrence via explainable imbalanced machine learning using high-resolution smartphone telematics and traffic data. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 207, 107743, 10.1016/j.aap.2024.107743.

38. Ziakopoulos, A., Vlahogianni, E., Antoniou, C., & Yannis, G. (2022). Spatial predictions of harsh driving events using statistical and machine learning methods. Safety Science, 150, 105722. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2022.105722