EEG Based Assessment of Pedestrian Perception of Automobile in Low Illumination Road

  • Rahul Bhardwaj
  • Venkatesh BalasubramanianEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 819)


Pedestrian involvement is a major subset of road crashes. It is estimated that pedestrian road crash is about 22% of all road traffic related deaths. Since pedestrians share road space and traffic, they are susceptible to the crashes especially where a large number of pedestrians are seen on roads. In this study, we have estimated the pedestrian’s response and time taken to estimate the correct recognition of the vehicle approaching them while crossing the road. EEG analysis has been performed to estimate cognitive response of pedestrians. Thirty volunteers participated in this study. Six scenarios were presented as were shown to the participants. Analysis was performed based on EEG acquired activity. It was observed that less beta activity (p > 0.0%) was estimated when participants were shown the video of “low beam car with active light source” and “high beam car with active light source”. This clearly indicates that active light source in addition to headlights of car make pedestrians less confused about the oncoming traffic. This helps them to cross especially in low illumination allies.


Pedestrian perception Pedestrian safety Pedestrian crossing Low illumination crashes Active light source 


  1. 1.
    Road Accidents in India – 2015 (2016) Ministry of Road Transport and Highways, Government of IndiaGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    National Highway and Traffic Safety Administration’s (NHTSA) (2015) National Center for Statistics and Analysis, Washington, D.C.
  3. 3.
    World Health Organization (WHO) (2013) Global status report on road safety: supporting a decade of action: summaryGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Sullivan JM, Flannagan MJ (2002) The role of ambient light level in fatal crashes: inferences from daylight saving time transitions. Accid Anal Prev 34(4):487–498CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Roudsari BS, Mock CN, Kaufman R (2005) An evaluation of the association between vehicle type and the source and severity of pedestrian injuries. Traffic Inj Prev 6(2):185–192CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Nasar JL, Troyer D (2013) Pedestrian injuries due to mobile phone use in public places. Accid Anal Prev 57:91–95CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Oh C, Kang YS, Kim B, Kim W (2005) Analysis of pedestrian-vehicle crashes in Korea. In: 84th annual meeting of the transportation research board, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Mohamed MG, Saunier N, Miranda-Moreno LF, Ukkusuri SV (2013) A clustering regression approach: a comprehensive injury severity analysis of pedestrian–vehicle crashes in New York, US and Montreal, Canada. Saf Sci 54:27–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Shinar D (1984) Actual versus estimated night-time pedestrian visibility. Ergonomics 27(8):863–871CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Blomberg RD, Hale A, Preusser DF (1986) Experimental evaluation of alternative conspicuity-enhancement techniques for pedestrians and bicyclists. J Saf Res 17(1):1–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Owens DA, Antonoff RJ, Francis EL (1994) Biological motion and nighttime pedestrian conspicuity. Hum Factors J Hum Factors Ergon Soc 36(4):718–732CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Oxley JA, Ihsen E, Fildes BN, Charlton JL, Day RH (2005) Crossing roads safely: an experimental study of age differences in gap selection by pedestrians. Accid Anal Prev 37(5):962–971CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Balasubramanian V, Bhardwaj R (2018) Pedestrians’ perception and response towards vehicles during road-crossing at nighttime. Accid Anal Prev 110:128–135CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Investment Information and Credit Rating Agency of India (ICRA) (2016)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    National Crime Research Bureau Ministry of Home Affairs (NCRB) (2016) Accidental deaths and suicide in India.
  16. 16.
    Theeuwes J, Alferdinck JW, Perel M (2002) Relation between glare and driving performance. Hum Factors J Hum Factors Ergon Soc 44(1):95–107CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kar S, Bhagat M, Routray A (2010) EEG signal analysis for the assessment and quantification of driver’s fatigue. Transp Res Part F: Traffic Psychol Behav 13(5):297–306CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Eoh HJ, Chung MK, Kim SH (2005) Electroencephalographic study of drowsiness in simulated driving with sleep deprivation. Int J Ind Ergon 35(4):307–320CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Klimesch W (1999) EEG alpha and theta oscillations reflect cognitive and memory performance: a review and analysis. Brain Res Rev 29(2):169–195CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Haria Seating Systems LimitedHosurIndia
  2. 2.RBG Lab, Engineering Design DepartmentIIT MadrasChennaiIndia

Personalised recommendations