Preprint
Article

This version is not peer-reviewed.

Analysis of Road Roughness and Driver’s Comfort in ‘Long-Haul’ Road Transportation Using a Random Forest Approach

A peer-reviewed version of this preprint was published in:
Sensors 2024, 24(18), 6115. https://doi.org/10.3390/s24186115

Submitted:

26 August 2024

Posted:

27 August 2024

You are already at the latest version

Abstract
Road safety and the effectiveness of the transportation system as a whole are significantly impacted by driver comfort. Road surface quality can play a significant part in the driver’s comfort experienced on roads in any country. This study employs a Random Forest technique to examine the association between road roughness and drivers' comfort during long-distance driving. Using Random Forest, a dependable machine learning technique that can handle big datasets and detect nonlinear correlations, this work aims to shed light on the complex dynamics between road conditions and driver’s comfort. 1,048,576 rows of data from MIRANDA, an application developed at the University of Gustave Eiffel, were used in this study as part of the data collected from a probe vehicle. The data collected includes an International Roughness Index (IRI). The IRI thresholds offer a simple method for assessing driver comfort and road irregularity. While highlighting how uneven and uncomfortable the road is, the research's findings (Road Roughness: SD – 0.73; Driver's Comfort: - Mean, 10.01, SD – 0.64) also contribute to the standardization of road condition evaluation and maintenance communication. This finding is anticipated to aid in the development of strategies for improving the welfare of long-haul drivers and fixing road infrastructure to comply with standard road index, ultimately leading to the creation of more efficient and sustainable transportation systems.
Keywords: 
;  ;  ;  ;  ;  ;  

1. Introduction

Since long-haul road transportation makes it possible to carry goods across great distances, it is essential to the global economy. Despite its vital relevance, the comfort of driver’s during these lengthy drives is frequently disregarded. Uncomfortable driving circumstances, like those brought on by uneven roads, have been linked to driver weariness, a drop in attention span, and a higher chance of collisions, according to [1]. Due to its versatility, long-haul transportation is essential to international trade. But long-distance driving can be taxing on drivers, compromising both their safety and well-being due to its demanding nature. Long-haul truck drivers deal with a variety of difficulties while driving for extended periods of time, including exhaustion, tension, and discomfort. Long-haul drivers’ comfort has a significant impact on their safety, degree of weariness, and general well-being [2] as discomfort can lead to fatigue, musculoskeletal disorders, and ultimately, safety risks [3].
Road roughness is a major aspect that affects driving experience because it can affect comfort and pleasure in general on lengthy trips. This aligns with the studies conducted in [4,5], which indicated that extended exposure to unfavorable road conditions, like uneven pavements may result in driver fatigue, discomfort, and even musculoskeletal diseases. The presence of potholes, bumps, and uneven surfaces on a road can greatly affect how comfortable drivers are. According to [6], the performance of drivers, job satisfaction, and general well-being are all directly impacted by their level of comfort and contentment.
Furthermore, the level of discomfort brought on by bad road conditions can raise stress levels, impair the focus of a driver, and raise the likelihood of an accident [7]. Road roughness accounted for the majority of accidents recorded as its consequential drowsy effects result into drivers losing control, driving outside the designated lane, and consequently having a headon collision with oncoming vehicles or hitting external objects [8]. Therefore, the enhancement of road safety and maximizing the effectiveness of transportation systems require an understanding of the components, correlation and connection between road roughness and drivers’ comfort. Transportation authorities and legislators can improve road infrastructure and lessen the detrimental effects of bad road conditions on the well-being of drivers by examining how road roughness affects the comfort of drivers, gives priority to investments in road maintenance, contributes to infrastructure improvements as well as technological advancements. Moreover, cultivating a culture of road safety and sustainability requires advocating for and raising awareness of the significance of road conditions for driver comfort.
Understanding the connection between road roughness and driver’s comfort during long-distance driving is the focus of this study. The techniques used to investigate the relationships between various factors that affect a driver are frequently insufficient to fully capture their intricacies. This study’s primary goal is to investigate and clarify the intricate relationships between road roughness and the comfort of drivers during long-distance driving using the Random Forest machine learning technique. In doing so, the study hopes to offer insights that can help with enhancing the quality of life of a driver and guiding the upkeep and improvement of road infrastructure. This study is anticipated to provide significant advances to our understanding of how road roughness affects driver comfort as well as to our knowledge of the critical elements and relationships that cause discomfort when traveling long distances. The study encourages a data-driven decision-making approach by showcasing the effectiveness of Random Forest in conducting the correlation analysis, notably in capturing nonlinear correlations and handling huge, complicated datasets. In the end, it seeks to enhance the safety of long-haul drivers by addressing important issues influencing their working environment.
Research in the transportation sector has been using the Random Forest approach as well as other machine learning algorithms for tasks such as route optimization, traffic prediction, and safety analysis. The benefit of using the Random Forest approach include its capability of managing extensive and intricate datasets. Random Forests is a potent machine learning technique that can identify nonlinear correlations among variables [9]. Random Forests handle multidimensional data and find significant predictor variables when analyzing the relationship between road roughness and drivers’ comfort. Its capacity to produce precise forecasts and feature importance rankings makes it an excellent choice for examining the complex relationships between road roughness and driver comfort. Using Random Forest analysis, we can find subtle trends in the data that other statistical techniques would miss, giving stakeholders and policymakers in the transportation sector important new information to support decision-making. In order to provide a thorough understanding of the complex interaction between road conditions and drivers’ comfort during long-haul transportation, this study explores the use of Random Forest regression which is adept at handling complex, non-linear relationships [10]. Traditional methods for studying this relationship, such as surveys or simple statistical analysis, often struggle to capture the intricacies involved [11]. By leveraging Random Forest, we aim to gain a deeper understanding of how road roughness interacts with other factors to influence driver comfort in long-haul transportation.

3. Methodology

To ensure an effective evaluation that gives the desired result, this study adopts subjective and objective assessment approaches. For the objective assessment, we employ the use of MIRANDA, a mobile application developed at the University of Gustave Eiffel, France. The application which is loaded on a smartphone is mounted on a driver’s vehicle, and captures and records the acceleration of the vehicles’ movements as well as other variables. For the subjective assessment, the study subjected the data collected through objective assessment to further computation using python scripts to calculate the magnitude of the acceleration from which the road roughness level was determined. The driver’s comfort level was also computed from the acceleration values (x, y, and z) alongside the acceleration magnitude. The data captured from these two assessments were then subjected to random forest machine learning analysis to evaluate the road roughness level and predict the driver’s comfort level. Using many decision trees and combining their predictions, Random Forest as a supervised machine learning technique, increases accuracy and robustness. In order to model the association between road roughness and drivers’ comfort, the analysis was further subjected to Pearson and Spearman Correlation analysis to evaluate the correlation between the driver’s comfort and the status of the road.
Table A1 and Table A2 (Appendix A and Appendix B) show the data collected and the one computed from it, while Figure 1 is the system model.

3.1. Detailed Analysis of the Model’s Components

3.1.1. Initializing and Loading MIRANDA App

The device used for measurement is an Android smartphone. The device utilized was a 6.5-inch Blackview BV9200 Rugged Smartphone running Android 12 with 256 GB of RAM, a 50 Megapixel camera, and 3G/4G connectivity. Raw data is provided by the sensors included in most smartphones (time, acceleration, GPS locations, etc.). The Miranda (Measurement of Road Indicators by Nomadic devices) application is installed on smartphones. The measurement session is managed by the Miranda application which also handles setting, survey activation and deactivation, measurement file production, and other tasks. During the test drive, the smartphone is integrated into a probe vehicle and utilized to gather data. Over the course of the data collection, eight (8) different probe vehicles were used. From these, 5,242,880 rows of data were generated; however, due to the maximum number of rows an Excel file could return, only 1,048,576 rows of data could be captured and used for this study.

3.1.2. The Server and Database

The gathered data is sent to a back-end server where the data is automatically analyzed to produce an estimated road profile and the associated indicator. An uploaded database contains the completed data/information. The finished data/information is uploaded to a database.

3.1.3. Converted & Merged Zipped Data

The data generated through the MIRANDA app and the sensor-based smartphone, were stored as zip files (https://filesender.renater.fr/?s=download&token=64a52d74-9a45-4747-9c47-9859095abcb1). Figure 2 and Figure 3 show the python scripts written to convert and also merge the various zip files/folders.

3.1.4. Preprocessing and Feature Selection

The collected data was further processed using data cleaning techniques (removal of incomplete/missing data). A filter feature selection technique was deployed to remove noisy or unwanted/irrelevant features. Figure 4 and Figure 5 show the python scripts used in some preprocessing done and direct selection of variables/columns from the study’s dataset.

3.1.5. Data Splitting

Data splitting involves partitioning the dataset into subsets to enhance training and testing. For this study, the dataset is divided into training dataset and testing dataset in the proportion of 80:20. Figure 6 is the python code snippet used for the splitting.

3.1.6. Model Initialization and Training

As a common practice in machine learning, the random initialization seed value is 42 to ensure consistency and reproducibility of results. The model training (X_train and y_train) was specified to allow the model to learn how the independent variables relate to the dependent variables. Figure 7 presents the python scripts that were used for this.

3.1.7. Model Prediction, Model Evaluation and Correlation Outputs

To avoid overfitting, the prediction is carried out on x_test data. This also assisted in ensuring that our model generalizes to new, unseen data. Performance evaluation (using Mean Squared Error (MSE), Mean Absolute Error (MAE) and R-Squared (R2) metrics) are also computed by predicting on the x_test data. Figure 8 shows the python codes executed to carry this out and also some outputs; Figure 9 and Figure 10 show the correlation analysis and plots, respectively, using both Pearson and Spearman’s correlation types.

4. Results and Discussion

4.1. The Model

As stated in 3.1.7, the random forest regression model was evaluated using the metrics: Mean Squared Error (MSE), Mean Absolute Error (MAE) and R-Squared (R2) (Equations (1)–(3))
M S E = 1 n i = 1 n y i y i ^ 2
where:
n—number of data points/observations (1,048,576 rows of data)
y i —actual value of the target variable (accl_magnitude) for the i-th data point
y i —predicted value of the target variable (accl_magnitude) for the i-th data point
y i y i ^ 2 —squared difference (or error) between actual and predicted values for each data point
M A E = 1 n i = 1 n y i y i ^
where:
n—number of data points/observations (1,048,576 rows of data)
y i —actual value of the target variable (accl_magnitude) for the i-th data point
y i —predicted value of the target variable (accl_magnitude) for the i-th data point
y i y i ^ —absolute difference (or error) between actual and predicted values for each data point
R 2 = 1 S S r e s S S t o t
where:
SSres - i = 1 n y i y i ^ 2 - the residual sum of squares
SStot - i = 1 n y i y i ¯ 2 - the total sum of squares
n—number of data points/observations (1,048,576 rows of data)
y i —actual value of the target variable (accl_magnitude) for the i-th data point
y i —predicted value of the target variable (accl_magnitude) for the i-th data point
y ¯ —mean value of the actual values of the target variable
The results computed show:
Mean Squared Error (MSE): 0.0005853207475788095
Mean Absolute Error (MAE): 0.004572441049036803
R-squared (R²): 0.9985087891157983
The results of this random forest regression model show that the model has operated successfully. The very low MSE value of 0.00059 shows how well the model’s predictions match the actual values. A low MSE indicates that large errors are extremely infrequent because squaring the errors penalizes larger errors more severely. Additionally, the MAE value of 0.00457 is quite low, meaning that the average error of the forecasts is only 0.00457 units. This tiny inaccuracy serves as additional proof of the model’s excellent forecast accuracy. An R-squared score of 0.9985 indicates that the features included in the model account for about 99.85% of the variance in the target variable (accl_magnitude). This is a very high number, meaning that practically all of the data variability is captured by the model.

4.2. The Metrics

Road roughness is commonly measured using the International Roughness Index (IRI), which is a commonly recognized standard. Road roughness is measured in meters per kilometer (m/km), with rougher roads denoted by greater numbers. Table 1 and Table 2 show the comparison between the IRI values and relevant acceleration measures, such as the acceleration magnitude (accl_magnitude) and standard deviation of vertical acceleration (accl_z), for road roughness and driver comfort levels, as presented in this study.
With the study’s computed results of:
Road Roughness Level (Standard Deviation of accl_z): 0.7288071585301953
Driver’s Comfort (Mean of accl_magnitude): 10.0101394667174
Driver’s Comfort (Standard Deviation of accl_magnitude): 0.6411496881655732
The Road Roughness Level (Standard Deviation of accl_z) of 0.7288 falls within the Moderately Rough category which corresponds to an IRI value between 2 to 4 m/km. This suggests that the road condition is average, with noticeable vertical movement.
The Driver’s Comfort (Mean of accl_magnitude) of 10.0101 m/s² and (Standard Deviation of accl_magnitude) of 0.6411 m/s² places the ride in the Uncomfortable category. This corresponds to an IRI value between 4 to 6 m/km. This indicates that the road conditions are rough enough to cause discomfort during driving.

4.3. The Correlation Matrix

From Figure 10a, there is a moderate negative correlation (-0.48) between accl_x and accl_y, meaning that increases in accl_x typically lead to decreases in accl_y. The association between accl_x and accl_z is weak (-0.14), and there is a modest inclination for accl_z to decrease as accl_x grows. The very poor positive correlation (0.10) between accl_x and accl_magnitude suggests that there is hardly any linear relationship between the two variables. For accl_y and accl_z, a moderately positive correlation (0.32) indicates that there may be some relationship between increases in accl_y and rises in accl_z. Increases in accl_z are strongly correlated (0.74) with increases in accl_magnitude, suggesting a strong positive relationship between the two variables. For time and other variables, there is no significant linear relationship between time and the other variables, as evidenced by the extremely weak correlations (from -0.02 to 0.26) with the acceleration components.
In a nutshell, the matrix shows that there is a substantial correlation (0.74) between the variables accl_z and accl_magnitude, suggesting a close relationship between them. Furthermore, accl_x and accl_y have a moderately negative association (-0.48), while accl_y and accl_z have a moderately positive correlation (0.32). On the other hand, time has weak correlations with the other variables, indicating that it does not have a significant and linear impact on the acceleration readings.

4.4. Implication of Findings

The results of this study have important ramifications for transportation agencies and decision makers in government. By prioritizing smoother road surfaces and minimizing discomfort and safety hazards for long-haul drivers, infrastructure investments and maintenance strategies can be guided by an understanding of the influence that road roughness has on drivers’ comfort. Additionally, the application of Random Forest analysis highlights the usefulness of machine learning in managing complicated datasets and capturing non-linear correlations, both of which can be extended to other transportation-related research fields. The study emphasizes the potential for raising driver well-being, lowering accident rates, and fostering a culture of road safety and sustainability through better road conditions.

5. Conclusion, Recommendation and Suggestions for Further Research

By clarifying the complex relationship between road roughness and drivers’ comfort, this study adds to the expanding corpus of research on road transportation. The study’s conclusion highlights how important road conditions are in affecting long-haul drivers’ comfort and safety. The use of Random Forest regression has shed important light on the complex interactions between driver discomfort and road roughness. It is advised that transportation authorities give road maintenance and infrastructure upgrades first priority in order to promote driver well-being and lower safety hazards, especially in areas that largely rely on long-haul transportation. To get a more thorough understanding of the variables affecting driver comfort, it is advised that future study investigate the inclusion of further factors such vehicle type, speed, and driver characteristics into the analysis. Furthermore, the broadening of the study to include other road conditions and geographic areas can offer a more comprehensive understanding of the findings’ worldwide application. The usefulness of cutting-edge technologies, including real-time road monitoring systems, in reducing the negative effects of uneven roads on driver comfort may also be the subject of future study.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, K.A.M., D.K., and D.L.; methodology, A.O.O.; software, A.O.O.; formal analysis, A.O.O.; investigation, A.O.O.; resources, A.O.O.; data curation, A.O.O.; writing—original draft preparation, A.O.O.; writing—review and editing, K.A.M., D.K., D.L. and A.O.O.; visualization, A.O.O.; supervision, K.A.M., and D.L. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This project is made possible through funding received from The Transport and Education Training Authority (TETA), project number: TETA22/R&K/PR0011.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Acknowledgments

The authors appreciate the funding provided by The Transport and Education Training Authority (TETA) for the execution of this research project. The encouragement and enabling environment from Tshwane University of Technology (TUT) is herewith appreciated.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declared no conflict of interest.

Appendix A

Table A1. Originally Converted and Extracted Data (few rows…).
Table A1. Originally Converted and Extracted Data (few rows…).
s/n Temps Acquisition (ms) Latitude Longitude Précision (m) Vitesse (m/s) Acceleration x (m/s²) Acceleration y (m/s²) Acceleration z (m/s²) Gyro x (rad/s) Gyro y (rad/s) Gyro z (rad/s) Magneto x (mGauss) Magneto y (mGauss) Magneto z (mGauss) Azimut auto (°) Tangage auto (°) Roulis auto (°) Azimut_accMagnet (°) Tangage_accMagnet (°) Roulis_accMagnet (°)
1 0 -26 28.3 4.4 0.04 0.13 -4 9.1 -0 0 0 -35 -18 117 46.3 23.2 1.6 52.3 23.3 -1.9
2 7 -26 28.3 4.4 0.04 0.16 -4 9.45 -0 0 0 -35 -18 117 46.3 23.2 1.6 52.7 23 -1.6
3 10 -26 28.3 4.4 0.04 0.34 -3.9 9.31 0 0 0 -35 -18 117 46.3 23.2 1.6 52 22.7 -0.9
4 15 -26 28.3 4.4 0.04 0.45 -3.9 9.05 -0 0.01 0 -35 -18 117 46.4 23.2 1.6 54.3 22.5 -2.1
5 24 -26 28.3 4.4 0.04 0.23 -3.8 9.12 -0 0 0 -35 -18 117 46.4 23.2 1.6 54.4 23.1 -2.8
6 24 -26 28.3 4.4 0.04 0.15 -4 9 -0 0 0 -35 -18 117 46.4 23.2 1.6 52.7 22.9 -1.5
7 30 -26 28.3 4.4 0.04 0.34 -4 9.17 -0 0 0 -35 -18 117 46.4 23.2 1.6 50 23.8 -0.9
8 35 -26 28.3 4.4 0.04 0.3 -4 9.5 -0 -0 -0 -35 -18 117 46.4 23.2 1.6 52.6 23.5 -2.1
9 41 -26 28.3 4.4 0.04 0.14 -3.9 9.4 -0 0 0 -35 -18 117 46.4 23.2 1.6 53.1 23 -1.8
10 44 -26 28.3 4.4 0.04 0.26 -4 9.45 -0 0 0 -35 -18 117 46.4 23.2 1.6 51.9 22.7 -0.9
11 49 -26 28.3 4.4 0.04 0.38 -3.9 9.31 -0 -0 0 -35 -18 117 46.4 23.2 1.6 53 22.8 -1.6
12 57 -26 28.3 4.4 0.04 0.3 -4 9.06 -0 0.01 0 -35 -18 117 46.4 23.1 1.6 54.4 22.7 -2.3
13 59 -26 28.3 4.4 0.04 0.2 -3.9 9.16 -0 0 0 -35 -18 117 46.4 23.2 1.6 51.9 23.7 -1.9
14 64 -26 28.3 4.4 0.04 0.35 -4.1 9.12 -0 0 0 -35 -18 117 46.4 23.1 1.6 51.5 23.3 -1.3
15 74 -26 28.3 4.4 0.04 0.46 -4 9.33 -0 -0 0 -35 -18 117 46.4 23.1 1.6 51.9 24 -2.2
16 75 -26 28.3 4.4 0.04 0.24 -4 9.43 -0 -0 0 -35 -18 117 46.4 23.2 1.6 54.1 23.4 -2.8
17 80 -26 28.3 4.4 0.04 0.12 -3.9 9.41 -0 0 0 -35 -18 117 46.4 23.2 1.6 52.4 23 -1.4
18 85 -26 28.3 4.4 0.04 0.39 -3.9 9.44 0 0 0 -35 -18 117 46.4 23.2 1.6 51.9 22.7 -0.8
19 91 -26 28.3 4.4 0.04 0.41 -3.9 9.2 -0 -0 0 -35 -18 117 46.4 23.2 1.6 54.7 22.7 -2.4
20 95 -26 28.3 4.4 0.04 0.17 -3.8 9.02 -0 0 0 -35 -18 117 46.4 23.1 1.6 54.9 22.7 -2.5
21 100 -26 28.3 4.4 0.04 0.14 -3.9 8.98 -0 0 0 -35 -18 117 46.5 23.1 1.6 51.9 23 -1
22 108 -26 28.3 4.4 0.04 0.35 -4 9.18 -0 0 0 -35 -18 117 46.5 23.1 1.6 50.5 23.6 -0.9
23 109 -26 28.3 4.4 0.04 0.31 -4 9.47 -0 -0 0 -35 -18 117 46.5 23.1 1.6 52.6 23.6 -2.2
24 115 -26 28.3 4.4 0.04 0.2 -4 9.35 -0 0 0 -35 -18 117 46.5 23.1 1.6 53 23.1 -1.9
25 125 -26 28.3 4.4 0.04 0.24 -4 9.39 -0 0 0 -35 -18 117 46.5 23.1 1.6 52.3 22.9 -1.2
26 125 -26 28.3 4.4 0.04 0.45 -3.9 9.35 -0 -0 0 -35 -18 117 46.5 23.2 1.6 52.7 22.9 -1.5
27 130 -26 28.3 4.4 0.04 0.36 -4 9.13 -0 0 0 -35 -18 117 46.5 23.1 1.6 55.3 22.7 -2.7
28 134 -26 28.3 4.4 0.04 0.13 -4 9.17 -0 0 0 -35 -18 117 46.5 23.2 1.6 53 23.5 -2.3
29 141 -26 28.3 4.4 0.04 0.19 -4.1 9.05 -0 0 0 -35 -18 117 46.5 23.1 1.6 50.7 23.4 -0.8
30 144 -26 28.3 4.4 0.04 0.52 -4.1 9.36 -0 -0 0 -35 -18 117 46.5 23.2 1.6 49.9 24.2 -1.2
1048541 1238693 -26 28.2 2.1 16.4 -1.1 0.84 8.91 0.02 -0 0.01 5.3 38.4 -11 355 2.1 -4.7 -6.4 0.5 5.2
1048542 1238695 -26 28.2 2.1 16.4 -0.8 0.12 9.02 0.01 0 0.01 5.3 38.4 -11 355 1.8 -5 -5.7 -5.4 6.9
1048543 1238702 -26 28.2 2.1 16.4 -1 -0.6 9.85 0.01 -0 0 5.3 38.4 -11 355 1.6 -5.1 -6.4 -0.8 5.1
1048544 1238711 -26 28.2 2.1 16.4 -0.8 -0.3 10.6 0.01 -0 0 5.3 38.4 -11 355 1.8 -5 -6.3 3.5 6
1048545 1238711 -26 28.2 2.1 16.4 -1.2 -0.3 9.31 0 -0 0 5.3 38.4 -11 355 1.6 -4.8 -6.7 1.4 4.2
1048546 1238720 -26 28.2 2.1 16.4 -1.2 -0.7 10.5 -0 -0 0.01 5.3 38.4 -11 355 1.7 -4.8 -5.8 2 7.5
1048547 1238728 -26 28.2 2.3 16.5 -1.2 -0.7 12.1 -0 -0 0.01 5.3 38.4 -11 355 1.8 -4.9 -6.1 3.6 6.7
1048548 1238728 -26 28.2 2.3 16.5 -0.1 -0.5 11.1 0.01 -0.1 0 5.2 38.5 -11 355 1.8 -5.1 -6.2 3.5 5.5
1048549 1238737 -26 28.2 2.3 16.5 -0.2 -0.3 10.3 0.02 -0 0 5.2 38.5 -11 355 1.8 -5.1 -7.6 2.4 0.6
1048550 1238737 -26 28.2 2.3 16.5 -0.2 -0.3 9.35 0.01 -0 0.01 5.2 38.5 -11 355 1.6 -5 -7.4 1.4 1
1048551 1238744 -26 28.2 2.3 16.5 -0.7 -0.5 10.5 0.01 0.02 0.01 5.2 38.5 -11 355 1.4 -4.9 -7.3 1.6 1.4
1048552 1238746 -26 28.2 2.3 16.5 -1.4 -0.7 9.15 0.01 -0 0.01 5.3 38.5 -11 355 1.7 -4.7 -6.9 2.5 3.6
1048553 1238754 -26 28.2 2.3 16.5 -1 -0.4 9.64 0.02 -0 0.02 5.3 38.5 -11 355 2 -4.6 -5.4 4.4 8.8
1048554 1238755 -26 28.2 2.3 16.5 -0.5 -0.5 9.4 0.02 0 0.01 5.3 38.5 -11 355 2 -4.8 -6.3 2.5 5.6
1048555 1238761 -26 28.2 2.3 16.5 -0.6 -0.5 10.8 0.03 -0 0 5.3 38.5 -11 355 1.7 -4.7 -7.1 3.3 2.9
1048556 1238770 -26 28.2 2.3 16.5 -0.2 -0.3 11.5 0.02 0.01 0.01 5.5 38.6 -11 355 1.8 -4.5 -7.3 2.5 3
1048557 1238771 -26 28.2 2.3 16.5 -1.1 -0.4 9.42 0.03 -0.1 0 5.5 38.6 -11 355 2.1 -4.4 -7.9 1.6 1.1
1048558 1238779 -26 28.2 2.3 16.5 -1.5 0.05 9.82 0.02 0.01 0.01 5.5 38.6 -11 355 2.3 -4.5 -6.2 2.6 6.6
1048559 1238781 -26 28.2 2.3 16.5 -0.3 0.09 10.4 0.03 0.04 0.01 5.5 38.6 -11 355 2 -4.6 -5.6 -0.3 8.5
1048560 1238788 -26 28.2 2.3 16.5 -0.6 0.02 9.51 0.02 -0 0 5.7 38.6 -11 355 1.7 -4.5 -8 -0.5 1.5
1048561 1238797 -26 28.2 2.3 16.5 -0.9 -0.4 11 0.02 0.01 0.01 5.7 38.6 -11 355 1.6 -4.6 -7.3 -0.1 3.7
1048562 1238797 -26 28.2 2.3 16.5 -0.4 -0.3 10.1 0.02 -0 0.01 5.7 38.6 -11 355 1.9 -4.3 -7.1 2.1 4.7
1048563 1238805 -26 28.2 2.3 16.5 -0.4 0.2 9.88 0.02 -0 0.01 5.7 38.6 -11 355 2 -4.3 -7.8 1.9 2.4
1048564 1238806 -26 28.2 2.3 16.5 -0.2 0.4 9.58 0.02 0.02 0.01 5.8 38.6 -11 355 1.6 -4.4 -7.7 -1.1 2.5
1048565 1238813 -26 28.2 2.3 16.5 -0.5 0.02 8.85 0.02 0.01 0.01 5.8 38.6 -11 355 1.2 -4.3 -8 -2.4 1.3
1048566 1238816 -26 28.2 2.3 16.5 -0.9 -0.8 8.68 0.02 0.03 0.01 5.8 38.6 -11 355 1.1 -4.2 -7.5 -0.1 3.3
1048567 1238823 -26 28.2 2.3 16.5 -1 -1 9.4 0.02 0.01 0.01 5.8 38.6 -11 355 1.5 -4.1 -7 5.2 5.9
1048568 1238830 -26 28.2 2.3 16.5 -0.7 -0.5 10.1 0.02 -0 0.01 5.7 38.6 -11 355 1.7 -4.1 -6.8 6 6.3
1048569 1238831 -26 28.2 2.3 16.5 -0.1 0.02 10.2 0.02 -0 0.01 5.7 38.6 -11 355 1.7 -4.2 -7.3 3 4
1048570 1238840 -26 28.2 2.3 16.5 -0.1 -0.3 10 0.02 0.01 0.01 5.7 38.6 -11 355 1.6 -4.2 -8.2 -0.1 0.8
1048571 1238841 -26 28.2 2.3 16.5 -0.5 -0.7 9.77 0.02 0.02 0.01 5.7 38.6 -11 355 1.6 -4 -8.4 1.7 0.3
1048572 1238847 -26 28.2 2.3 16.5 -0.9 -0.9 8.66 0.02 0.01 0.01 5.6 38.6 -11 355 1.9 -3.9 -7.6 4 2.7
1048573 1238857 -26 28.2 2.3 16.5 -1.5 -0 8.7 0.02 0.02 0.01 5.6 38.6 -11 355 2.1 -3.9 -6.6 5.6 6
1048574 1238857 -26 28.2 2.3 16.5 -1.4 0.6 9.95 0.02 0.01 0.01 5.6 38.6 -11 355 2 -4 -5.2 0.2 10
1048575 1238865 -26 28.2 2.3 16.5 -0.2 0.59 10.3 0.02 0.01 0.01 5.6 38.6 -11 355 1.8 -4.1 -5.7 -3.4 8

Appendix B

Table A2. Computed data.
Table A2. Computed data.
s/n accl_x accl_y accl_z time accl_magnitude
1 0.126 -3.979 9.1 0.227273 9.932689314
2 0.155 -3.96 9.445 0.227273 10.24273645
3 0.342 -3.866 9.306 0.227273 10.08288431
4 0.45 -3.871 9.052 0.227273 9.855244543
5 0.234 -3.847 9.119 0.227273 9.900016465
6 0.146 -3.967 8.995 0.227273 9.832010476
7 0.342 -3.991 9.167 0.227273 10.00394592
8 0.304 -4.031 9.495 0.227273 10.3197094
9 0.143 -3.933 9.402 0.227273 10.19247477
10 0.258 -3.969 9.447 0.227273 10.25013824
11 0.375 -3.895 9.308 0.227273 10.09705472
12 0.301 -3.974 9.064 0.227273 9.901483374
13 0.203 -3.948 9.157 0.227273 9.973894024
14 0.354 -4.062 9.121 0.227273 9.990885897
15 0.464 -4.034 9.327 0.227273 10.17257986
16 0.237 -4.012 9.43 0.227273 10.25071768
17 0.124 -3.931 9.411 0.227273 10.19975774
18 0.39 -3.948 9.44 0.227273 10.23974629
19 0.409 -3.852 9.196 0.227273 9.97855706
1048555 -0.567 -0.476 10.793 0.434783 10.81836004
1048556 -0.22 -0.311 11.484 0.434783 11.49031666
1048557 -1.094 -0.433 9.421 0.434783 9.494185905
1048558 -1.462 0.052 9.818 0.434783 9.926392698
1048559 -0.28 0.09 10.381 0.434783 10.38516543
1048560 -0.62 0.019 9.507 0.434783 9.527214178
1048561 -0.897 -0.404 10.97 0.434783 11.01402401
1048562 -0.43 -0.337 10.053 0.434783 10.06783383
1048563 -0.438 0.196 9.88 0.434783 9.89164597
1048564 -0.217 0.402 9.579 0.434783 9.589887069
1048565 -0.507 0.016 8.848 0.434783 8.862528364
1048566 -0.893 -0.792 8.678 0.434783 8.75970302
1048567 -1.039 -0.993 9.402 0.434783 9.511213067
1048568 -0.706 -0.521 10.084 0.434783 10.12210121
1048569 -0.136 0.021 10.242 0.434783 10.24292444
1048570 -0.057 -0.294 9.998 0.434783 10.00248414
1048571 -0.462 -0.679 9.77 0.434783 9.804457405
1048572 -0.912 -0.852 8.664 0.434783 8.753430413
1048573 -1.537 -0.031 8.702 0.434783 8.836749063
1048574 -1.393 0.6 9.947 0.434783 10.06197088
1048575 -0.172 0.593 10.347 0.434783 10.36540602

References

  1. Liu, Y.C.; Wu, T.J. Fatigued driver’s driving behavior and cognitive task performance: Effects of road environments and road environment changes. Safety Science 2009, 47, 1083–1089. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Dong, W.; Li, Y.; Sun, C.; Hu, Y. A review of the relationship between road roughness and driving comfort. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 2020, 17, 4324. [Google Scholar]
  3. Hancock, P.A.; Rogers, W.A. Fatigue and Attention. In Handbook of Human Factors and Ergonomics, 5th ed. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., 2019, pp. 24.1–24.43.
  4. Pickard; Burton, P. ; Yamada, H.; Schram, B.; Canetti, E.F.; Orr, R. Musculoskeletal disorders associated with occupational driving: a systematic review spanning 2006-2021. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 2022, 19, 6837. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Chen, Y.L.; Alexander, H.; Hu, Y.M. Self-reported musculoskeletal disorder symptoms among bus drivers in the Taipei metropolitan area. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 2022, 19, 10596. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. Trivedi, N.; Abraham, J.; Dhar, U. Job Satisfaction and Occupational Stress among Drivers in Long-Distance Transportation: A Qualitative Study. Journal of Transportation Engineering, Part A: Systems 2019, 145, 04018078. [Google Scholar]
  7. Salmon, P.M.; Cornelissen, M.; Trotter, M.J.; Read, G.J.M. The Systems Thinking Scale: Measuring the Systems Thinking Capabilities of Individuals. Systems Research and Behavioral Science 2017, 34, 143–169. [Google Scholar]
  8. Mkwata, R.; Chong, E.E.M. Effect of pavement surface conditions on road traffic accident-A Review. in In E3S web of conferences, 2022.
  9. Breiman, L. Random forests. Machine Learning 2001, 45, 5–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Liaw; Wiener, M. Classification and Regression by Random Forest. R News 2002, 2, 18–22. [Google Scholar]
  11. Casey, M.B.; Azcona, S.M. Random Forest as a Predictive Analytics Alternative to Regression in Institutional Research. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation 2017, 22, 1–9. [Google Scholar]
  12. Yildirim, S.; Uzmay, I. Statistical analysis of vehicles’ vibration due to road roughness using radial basis artificial neural network. Applied Artificial Intelligence 2001, 15, 419–427. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Lin, J.D.; Yau, J.T.; Hsiao, L.H. Correlation analysis between international roughness index (IRI) and pavement distress by neural network. In 82nd Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board 2003, 12, 1–21. [Google Scholar]
  14. Hassan, R.A.; McManus, K. Assessment of interaction between road roughness and heavy vehicles. Transportation research record 2003, 1819, 236–243. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Hesami, R.; McManus, K.J. Signal processing approach to road roughness analysis and measurement. in In TENCON 2009-2009 IEEE Region 10 Conference, 2009.
  16. Cantisani, G.; Loprencipe, G. Road roughness and whole body vibration: Evaluation tools and comfort limits. Journal of Transportation Engineering 2010, 136, 818–826. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Yang, Y.B.; Li, Y.C.; Chang, K.C. Effect of road surface roughness on the response of a moving vehicle for identification of bridge frequencies. Interaction and multiscale mechanics 2012, 5, 347–368. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Agostinacchio, M.; Ciampa, D.; Olita, S. The vibrations induced by surface irregularities in road pavements–a Matlab® approach. European Transport Research Review 2014, 6, 267–275. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Bridgelall, R. Connected vehicle approach for pavement roughness evaluation. Journal of Infrastructure Systems 2014, 20, 04013001. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Du, Y.; Liu, C.; Wu, D.; Jiang, S. Measurement of International Roughness Index by Using Z-Axis Accelerometers and GPS. Mathematical Problems in Engineering 2014, 2014, 928980. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Pal, M.; Sutradhar, R. Pavement roughness prediction systems: a bump integrator approach. International Journal of Civil and Environmental Engineering 2014, 8, 1258–1261. [Google Scholar]
  22. Zhang, Z.; Deng, F.; Huang, Y.; Bridgelall, R. Road roughness evaluation using in-pavement strain sensors. Smart Materials and Structures 2015, 24, 115029. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Louhghalam; Tootkaboni, M. ; Ulm, F.J. Roughness-induced vehicle energy dissipation: Statistical analysis and scaling. Journal of Engineering Mechanics 2015, 141, 04015046. [Google Scholar]
  24. Bärgman, J.; Smith, K.; Werneke, J. Quantifying drivers’ comfort-zone and dread-zone boundaries in left turn across path/opposite direction (LTAP/OD) scenarios. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour 2015, 35, 170–184. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Ueckermann; Oeser, M. Approaches for a 3D assessment of pavement evenness data based on 3D vehicle models. Journal of Traffic and Transportation Engineering (english edition) 2015, 2, 68–80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Mubaraki, M. Highway subsurface assessment using pavement surface distress and roughness data. International Journal of Pavement Research and Technology 2016, 9, 393–402. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Abulizi, N.; Kawamura, A.; Tomiyama, K.; Fujita, S. Measuring and evaluating of road roughness conditions with a compact road profiler and ArcGIS. Journal of Traffic and Transportation Engineering (English Edition) 2016, 3, 398–411. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Zhao, B.; Nagayama, T. IRI estimation by the frequency domain analysis of vehicle dynamic responses. in Procedia Engineering, 2017.
  29. Tsubota, T.; Fernando, C.; Yoshii, T.; Shirayanagi, H. Effect of road pavement types and ages on traffic accident risks. in Transportation research procedia, 2018.
  30. Fortunatus, M.; Onyango, L.; Fomunung, I.; Owino, J. Use of a smart phone based application to measure roughness of polyurethane stabilized concrete pavement. Civ. Eng. Res. J. 2018, 4, 555645. [Google Scholar]
  31. Nguyen, T.; Lechner, B.; Wong, Y.D. Response-based methods to measure road surface irregularity: A state-of-the-art review. European Transport Research Review 2019, 11, 1–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Wang, G.; Burrow, M.; Ghataora, G. Study of the factors affecting road roughness measurement using smartphones. Journal of Infrastructure Systems 2020, 26, 04020020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Bajic, M.; Pour, S.M.; Skar, A.; Pettinari, M.; Levenberg, E.; Alstrøm, T.S. Road roughness estimation using machine learning. arXiv 2021, arXiv:2107.01199. [Google Scholar]
  34. Múčka, P. International roughness index thresholds based on whole-body vibration in passenger cars. Transportation Research Record 2021, 2675, 305–320. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Azizan, M.S.; Taher, M.N.M. Evaluation of Pavement Ride Quality on Road Networks Using Smartphone Application. Recent Trends in Civil Engineering and Built Environment 2021, 2, 323–329. [Google Scholar]
  36. Alomari, H.; Khedaywi, T.S.; Marian, A.R.O.; Jadah, A.A. Traffic speed prediction techniques in urban environments. Heliyon 2022, 8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  37. Wang, X.; Cheng, Z.; Ma, N. Road recognition based on vehicle vibration signal and comfortable speed strategy formulation using ISA algorithm. Sensors 2022, 22, 6682. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  38. Liu, C.; Wu, D.; Li, Y.; Jiang, S.; Du, Y. Mathematical insights into the relationship between pavement roughness and vehicle vibration. International Journal of Pavement Engineering 2022, 23, 1935–1947. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Hanandeh, S. Introducing mathematical modeling to estimate pavement quality index of flexible pavements based on genetic algorithm and artificial neural networks. Case Studies in Construction Materials 2022, 16, e00991. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Shtayat; Moridpour, S. ; Best, B. Using e-bikes and private cars in dynamic road pavement monitoring. International Journal of Transportation Science and Technology 2022, 11, 132–143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Rajput, P.; Chaturvedi, M.; Patel, V. Road condition monitoring using unsupervised learning based bus trajectory processing. Multimodal Transportation 2022, 1, 100041. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Sandamal, K.; Shashiprabha, S.; Muttil, N.; Rathnayake, U. Pavement roughness prediction using explainable and supervised machine learning technique for long-term performance. Sustainability 2023, 15, 9617. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Ali, A.; Heneash, U.; Hussein, A.; Khan, S. Application of Artificial neural network technique for prediction of pavement roughness as a performance indicator. Journal of King Saud University-Engineering Sciences 2024, 36, 128–139. [Google Scholar]
  44. Choudhary; Garg, R. D.; Jain, S.S. Estimating impact of pavement surface condition and geometrics design on two-wheeler run-off road crashes on horizontal curves. IATSS research 2024, 48, 108–119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Saeed, N.; Alam, M.; Nyberg, R.G. A multimodal deep learning approach for gravel road condition evaluation through image and audio integration. Transportation Engineering 2024, 16, 100228. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Figure 1. System Model.
Figure 1. System Model.
Preprints 116288 g001
Figure 3. Python File Merge Scripts.
Figure 3. Python File Merge Scripts.
Preprints 116288 g002
Figure 4. Preprocessing done for accel_magnitude.
Figure 4. Preprocessing done for accel_magnitude.
Preprints 116288 g003
Figure 5. Feature Selection.
Figure 5. Feature Selection.
Preprints 116288 g004
Figure 6. Data splitting.
Figure 6. Data splitting.
Preprints 116288 g005
Figure 7. Model initialization and training.
Figure 7. Model initialization and training.
Preprints 116288 g006
Figure 8. Model prediction and evaluation.
Figure 8. Model prediction and evaluation.
Preprints 116288 g007
Figure 9. Correlation analysis.
Figure 9. Correlation analysis.
Preprints 116288 g008
Figure 10. (a): Correlation Matrix. (b): Bar Chart.
Figure 10. (a): Correlation Matrix. (b): Bar Chart.
Preprints 116288 g009
Table 1. IRI vs Road Roughness Level.
Table 1. IRI vs Road Roughness Level.
IRI Classification IRI Value (m/km) Standard Deviation of Vertical Acceleration (accl_z) Road Condition Description
Very Smooth 0–1 < 0.3 Excellent road condition, minimal vertical movement.
Smooth 1–2 0.3–0.5 Good road condition, slight vertical movement.
Moderately Rough 2–4 0.5–0.8 Average road condition, noticeable vertical movement.
Rough 4–6 0.8–1.2 Poor road condition, significant vertical movement.
Very Rough > 6 > 1.2 Very poor road condition, severe vertical movement.
Table 2. IRI vs Driver’s Comfort Level.
Table 2. IRI vs Driver’s Comfort Level.
Comfort Level IRI Value (m/km) Mean Acceleration Magnitude (accl_magnitude) (m/s²) Standard Deviation of Acceleration Magnitude (accl_magnitude) (m/s²) Comfort Description
Very Comfortable 0–1 < 0.2 < 0.1 Extremely smooth, minimal vibrations.
Comfortable 1–2 0.2–0.5 0.1–0.3 Generally smooth, low vibrations.
Acceptable 2–4 0.5–1.0 0.3–0.6 Slightly rough, moderate vibrations.
Uncomfortable 4–6 1.0–1.5 0.6–1.0 Rough, noticeable vibrations.
Very Uncomfortable > 6 > 1.5 > 1.0 Very rough, strong vibrations.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.
Copyright: This open access article is published under a Creative Commons CC BY 4.0 license, which permit the free download, distribution, and reuse, provided that the author and preprint are cited in any reuse.
Prerpints.org logo

Preprints.org is a free preprint server supported by MDPI in Basel, Switzerland.

Subscribe

Disclaimer

Terms of Use

Privacy Policy

Privacy Settings

© 2026 MDPI (Basel, Switzerland) unless otherwise stated