Searcharxiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2512.21136

Modeling gap acceptance behavior allowing for perceptual distortions and exogenous influences

Ankita Sharma·Partha Chakroborty·Pranamesh Chakraborty
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

This work on gap acceptance is based on the premise that the decision to accept/reject a gap happens in a person's mind and therefore must be based on the perceived gap and not the measured gap. The critical gap must also exist in a person's mind and hence, together with the perceived gap, is a latent variable. Finally, it is also proposed that the critical gap is influenced by various exogenous variables such as subject and opposing vehicle types, and perceived waiting time. Mathematical models that (i) incorporate systematic and random distortions during the perception process and (ii) account for the effect of the various influencing variables are developed. The parameters of these models are estimated for two different gap acceptance data sets using the maximum likelihood technique. The data is collected as part of this study. The estimated parameters throw valuable insights into how these influencing variables affect the critical gap. The results corroborate the initial predictions on the nature of influence these variables must exert and give strength to the gap acceptance decision-making construct proposed here. This work also proposes a methodology to estimate a measurable/observable world emulator of the latent variable critical gap. The use of the emulator critical gap provides improved estimates of derived quantities like the average waiting time of subject vehicles. Finally, studies are also conducted to show that the number of rejected gaps can work as a reasonable surrogate for the influencing variable, waiting time.

Explore related subjects

stat.MEmath.PRstat.AP

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Ankita Sharma, Partha Chakroborty, Pranamesh Chakraborty. 2025-12-24. Modeling gap acceptance behavior allowing for perceptual distortions and exogenous influences. https://arxiv.org/abs/2512.21136

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Surprise Reduction and Nullification in Bayesian and Inverse Bayesian Inference under Ambiguous Prediction-Error Attribution

In non-stationary environments, prediction errors may signal environmental change or transient outliers, and adaptive systems must track such changes without overreacting to outliers. We distinguish surprise reduction, which updates beliefs to fit observations, from surprise nullification, which weakens constraints imposed by the predictive structure, and formalize both within Bayesian and inverse Bayesian (BIB) inference. Belief and likelihood updates are derived from variational objectives sharing a nullification strength, determined endogenously by minimizing surprise under the candidate post-update predictive distribution. In the Gaussian case, nullification expands belief and likelihood variances by a common factor relative to standard Bayesian updating, leaving the ratio unchanged. BIB thus defers attribution of the prediction error, committing to neither latent-state change nor observation-process uncertainty. The nullification strength is carried over as a candidate and is maintained or released according to the predictive surprise of the next observation. In a mean estimation task with outliers and changepoints, no scanned parameter setting of a Sage-Husa-type adaptive Kalman filter, fixed-strength BIB variant, or belief-forgetting-only variant outperforms BIB in both changepoint tracking and post-outlier stability. An oracle-informed reduced Bayesian model tracks changepoints better but is less stable after outliers. Although BIB maintains no explicit hypotheses about changepoints or outliers, it generates event-dependent dynamics. The learning rate increases after changepoints, whereas after outliers, nullification is released, and this increase is suppressed. Deferring attribution and letting subsequent observations differentiate the responses may constitute a principle of adaptive inference in non-stationary environments.

stat.ME↗
arXiv2026

Generalized Ridge Refitting for the Lasso and Prediction Improvement Bounds

We study a class of Lasso based estimators obtained by applying a quadratic correction on the Lasso equicorrelation set. The penalty matrix determines both the magnitude and geometry of the correction and contains, among other cases, the isotropic Lasso--Ridge correction, least squares refitting, Gram proportional interpolation between the Lasso and least squares, and coordinate specific penalties. We first derive a closed form representation and isolate the positive gain component of the resulting prediction improvement. We then control the remaining stochastic linear term in expectation by localizing the random signed equicorrelation model around a deterministic reference support. This yields a finite sample expectation bound that explicitly accounts for the randomness induced by Lasso model selection. The resulting decomposition provides a unified framework for understanding when Lasso based quadratic corrections can improve prediction.

stat.ME↗
arXiv2026

Discretization in covariate-adaptive randomization: gains and losses

Covariate-adaptive randomization(CAR) is widely implemented in clinical trials to balance prognostic covariates across treatment arms. Continuous covariates are often discretized into strata in practice, yet their consequences are not clearly understood. This paper provides a comprehensive study of the impact of discretization on both the CAR design process and the inferential results thereafter. We establish the asymptotic properties of both imbalance measures and treatment effect estimators under discretized and non-discretized settings. Practical recommendations are given on when and how discretization should be employed. We show that discretization in design is generally recommended, as it enhances robustness against model misspecification. However, if the true model is known, the most efficient strategy is to balance covariates according to that model in the design. The theoretical results are corroborated by extensive simulation studies and an empirical application to a diabetes trial dataset. Together, the results clarify the gains and losses of discretization in CAR and pave the way for learning impact of discretization to other designs and beyond.

stat.ME↗