Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39076815›Full record

ArticleRoyal Society open science2024

Putting ChatGPT vision (GPT-4V) to the test: risk perception in traffic images.

Tom Driessen, Dimitra Dodou, Pavlo Bazilinskyy, Joost de Winter

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Royal Society open science, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Tom DriessenDelft University of Technology, Delft, Zuid-Holland, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1053-6020
Dimitra DodouDelft University of Technology, Delft, Zuid-Holland, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9428-3261
Pavlo BazilinskyyEindhoven University of Technology, Eindhoven, Noord-Brabant, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9565-8240
Joost de WinterDelft University of Technology, Delft, Zuid-Holland, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-1281-8200

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Vision-language models are of interest in various domains, including automated driving, where computer vision techniques can accurately detect road users, but where the vehicle sometimes fails to understand context. This study examined the effectiveness of GPT-4V in predicting the level of 'risk' in traffic images as assessed by humans. We used 210 static images taken from a moving vehicle, each previously rated by approximately 650 people. Based on psychometric construct theory and using insights from the self-consistency prompting method, we formulated three hypotheses: (i) repeating the prompt under effectively identical conditions increases validity, (ii) varying the prompt text and extracting a total score increases validity compared to using a single prompt, and (iii) in a multiple regression analysis, the incorporation of object detection features, alongside the GPT-4V-based risk rating, significantly contributes to improving the model's validity. Validity was quantified by the correlation coefficient with human risk scores, across the 210 images. The results confirmed the three hypotheses. The eventual validity coefficient was

Indexed as

ChatGPTimage-to-textrisk perceptiontraffic

Identifiers

PMID39076815
PMCPMC11285896

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.