Shows improved safety perception in cyclists, indicating the need for effective infrastructure designs.
Despite growing policy support for active travel, the fatality rate of vulnerable road users has remained persistently high in recent years, while the emergence of autonomous vehicles has further increased the complexity of mixed traffic environments. Interactions between cyclists and motorized vehicles are a major contributor to these fatalities, highlighting the urgent need for effective cyclist protection strategies. As one of the most widely adopted active transport modes, cycling safety cannot be assessed solely through crash statistics; understanding cyclists’ perceived safety is equally critical, as it reflects how infrastructure design and dynamic traffic conditions influence cycling behavior. In this study, we propose a cyclist safety perception framework that combines vision–language models with interpretable machine learning to analyze perceived safety in mixed traffic scenarios. A vision–language model is employed to generate semantic descriptions of traffic scenes, while an Explainable Boosting Machine quantifies both individual and interactive contributions of traffic-related features. By integrating visual information with road attributes extracted from OpenStreetMap, the proposed framework achieves a binary safety classification accuracy of 71% and a mean absolute error of 1.01 on a safety score scale ranging from 1 to 9. The results demonstrate the potential of combining multimodal perception and explainable models to support cyclist-centered safety assessment and inform sustainable and intelligent transportation system design. More specifically, the results show that protected cycling infrastructure is the most significant factor in improving perceived safety, whereas road construction has the opposite effect.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Chiang et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: