1. Saving Lives with CARE New Developments: 2004 David B. Brown, PhD, PE brown@cs.ua.eduhttp://care.cs.ua.edu 30th International Traffic Records Forum Denver, Colorado July 27, 2004

2. Background: Objective of CARE  Maximum Safety Increases  Fatality reduction  Injury reduction  Crash frequency reduction  Severity reduction  Within Budget Constraints

3. Accomplishing This Objective  Determine  Extent of problem  Potential for benefit  Formulate Countermeasures  Target - who, what, where  Approach - when, why, how

4. Reduction Potential Example  Countermeasure: Hot Dots – Refectorized “stick- ons” given to young people in rural areas  Sub-population  children, age 5-16...  involved in pedestrian crash...  in the target areas (rural)...  occurring in darkness.  Potential: 3 Crashes per year (1.7% of problem)  How many of these affected by Hot Dots?  Could money better be spent on general program to help the 181 pedestrians injured age 5-16?  The answer is obvious given the information.

5. Advantages of Local Use  Centralized Capability is Limited  Locals Can Best Interpret Results  Countermeasures Developed Must:  Meet local needs  Fit within local environment  Fit available resources  Local Use Improves Data Quality  There is Nothing Like Hands-On

6. CARE Objectives  Provide Local/State Officials  Complete analytical capability  Minimal training  On available equipment  Public Domain:  No software cost for CARE  Web Updates accessible

7. CARE Applications  States Crash Databases  9 States with general system  2 States with locations (AL, GA)  Other Database Types:  Uniform Crime Reports – I/O, Arrest  Drivers’ License, Juvenile, Citations  Driver History, Convictions

8. CARE Capabilities: General  Easily define subsets (filters)  For any subset and all variables:  Frequency  Cross-tabulation  IMPACT: information mining  High crash location analyses  Collision diagrams – Intersection Magic  Hotspot lists and reports

9. What was the 2002 day-of-the- week distribution for crashes in Fulton Co, GA?

15. Example Innovative Features  User Interface: Filter Creation  Filter creation from frequency or Xtab  ANDs with the current filter  Data Integration  Roadway characteristics  ADT  Friction

17. The Scenario  Performing Alcohol Analysis  Crosstab: Rural/Urban by Severity  Identify problem in the rural areas  Want to determine source of problem  Solution  Use CARE’s automated filter generation  Perform Information Mining (IMPACT)

18. Automated Filter Creation

19. Following up with IMPACT

21. Questions to be Addressed  What role do the characteristics play in …  Crash causation?  Crash severity?  Which characteristics are most important?  Costs to change  Potential for crash reduction  Where should changes be made first?  Provide benefit estimates  Fit into resource optimization procedure  Affect on roadway reconstruction?

22. Roadway Characteristics and Crash Integration Goals:  Integrate crash with road characteristics  Obtain correlations: crashes & characteristics  Identify potentially hazardous locations  Provide crash reduction information

23. Roadway Characteristics Integrated  Number of Lanes (one/multiple)  Average Grade  Hill Crest/Sag (derived)  Shoulder Surface Type and Condition  Lane/Shoulder Width  Outer/Inner Lane Superelevation  Outer/inner Lane Width  Curvature (derived)  Proximal Curvature (derived)  ADT (separate file)  Friction (separate file)

24. Major Accomplishments Summary  Road Characteristics  Written to crash data  Nice for creating crash subsets  Crashes Written to Roadway Data  One Record Per 0.1 Mile in each direction  All roadway characteristics in record  Also: crashes for segments by severity

25. New CARE Functionality  Can Now Compare  Crash with non-crash segments  For all geometric & crash attributes  Finding Problems …  Before they cause crashes  Directly from roadway characteristics

26. To Illustrate Capabilities Example Direct Indicators of Hazards  Friction Analyses  Summary of worse roads  High-crash location analysis  Superelevation vs. Curvature  CARE Runs  3501-5205 ADT 2L Crash vs. Non-Crash  Lowest friction vs. higher frictions

27. Superelevation vs. Curvature