Traffic safety considers an essential aspect of transportation engineering, yet the results of the various methods used in their evaluation often differ significantly. Lately, there has been increasing interest in utilising micro-simulation software to evaluate traffic safety through analysing the file trajectories of vehicles and counting various indicators of conflicts. The major objective of this study is thus to validate such simulation through examining the relationship between traffic conflicts extracted from coupling the VISSIM simulation model with both the Surrogate Safety Assessment Model (SSAM) and field measures of conflicts. Thirty-two hours of traffic data were collected from four cameras at the Arbein Street signalised intersection over two days; these were installed at the four intersection approaches, and each camera recorded for four hours per day. The famous safety indicator Time-To-Collision (TTC) was then used to estimate simulation traffic conflicts. Such conflicts were then extracted from the field data and compared with the simulated conflicts to assess the consistency between simulated and observed conflicts and to calibrate the VISSIM simulation model. The results showed that calibration of the model reduced mean absolute preventable error (MAPE) from 55% to 33% for rear-end conflicts, from 71.5% to 38.5% for lane-change conflicts, and from 67% to 47% for crossing conflicts; in general, total conflicts decreased from 62% to 37%. This calibration thus led to an improvement in the consistency of the two approaches used. A linear regression model and Spearman Rank Correlation Coefficient (SRCC) were then developed to examine the relationship between observed and simulated conflicts. The R2 values of the linear regression models varied, ranging from over 60% to 76% for different types of conflicts. The Spearman Rank Correlation Coefficient (SRCC) was 86%, however, indicating reasonable consistency between the two approaches.

1.
R. Z.
Abdul-Majeed
and
H. A.
Ewadh
, “
Serious Conflicts: A Safety Performance Measure at Signalized Intersections
,” In
Proceedings of the AICCE’19, (AWAM International Conference on Civil Engineering
,
2019
), pp.
291
306
.
2.
K. K.
Subcity
,
“Modeling of Traffic Accident and Safety Assessment Using VISSIM and SSAM Case Study.”
ADDIS ABABA Science and Technology University
,
2019
.
3.
H. A.
Ewadh
and
S. S.
Neham
, in
Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers-Transport
,
221
230
,
164
, (
2011
).
4.
D.
Gettman
and
L.
Head
,
Transp. Res. Rec.
,
104
115
,
1840
(
2003
).
5.
L.
Zheng
,
T.
Sayed
,
M.
Essa
, and
Y.
Guo
, “
Do simulated traffic conflicts predict crashes? an investigation using the extreme value approach
,” In
Proceeding of the IEEE Intelligent Transportation Systems Conference (ITSC)
, (
IEEE
,
Auckland, NewZeeland
,
2019
), pp.
631
636
.
6.
N.
Saunier
,
T.
Sayed
, and
C.
Lim
, “
Probabilistic collision prediction for vision-based automated road safety analysis
,” In
Proceeding of the IEEE Intelligent Transportation Systems Conference
, (
IEE
,
Seattle
,
2007
), pp.
872
878
.
7.
M.
Essa
and
T.
Sayed
,
Transp. Res. Rec.
,
100
112
,
2674
(
2020
).
8.
A. M.
Molan
,
J. E.
Hummer
,
L.
Aspeitia
, and
A. M.
Deatherage
,
“Evaluating Safety Performance of the Offset Diamond Interchange Design using VISSIM and Surrogate Safety Assessment Model,”
2021
.
9.
M.
Essa
and
T.
Sayed
,
Transp. Res. Rec.
,
48
57
,
2514
(
2015
).
10.
R.
Fan
,
H.
Yu
,
P.
Liu
, and
W.
Wang
,
IET Intell. Transp. Syst.
,
68
77
,
7
(
2013
).
11.
U.
Shahdah
,
F.
Saccomanno
, and
B.
Persaud
,
Application of traffic microsimulation for evaluating safety performance of urban signalized intersections
, (
Transp. Res. Part C Emerg. Technol.
,
60
,
2015
). pp.
96
104
12.
A.
Dijkstra
,
P.
Marchesini
,
F.
Bijleveld
,
V.
Kars
,
H.
Drolenga
, and
M.
Van Maarseveen
,
Transp. Res. Rec.
,
105
112
2147
(
2010
).
13.
A.
Ariza
, Validation of the surrogate safety assessment model for assessment of intersection safety,
Transp. Res. Rec.
, vol.
2432
, no.
1
, pp.
1
9
,
2014
.
14.
Y.
Guoa
,
M.
Essaa
,
T.
Sayeda
,
M. M.
Haqueb
, and
S.
Washington
, A comparison between simulated and field-measured conflicts for safety assessment of signalized intersections in Australia,
Transp. Res. part C Emerg. Technol.
, vol.
101
, pp.
96
110
,
2019
.
15.
M. R.
Parker
and
C. V
Zegeer
,
Traffic conflict techniques for safety and operation-observers manual (No. FHWA-IP-88-027
),
Fed. Highw. Adm. US Dep. Transp., 1989.
16.
L.
Pu
,
R.
Joshi
, and
S.
Energy
,
“Surrogate Safety Assessment Model (SSAM)--software user manual,”
Turner-Fairbank Highway Research Center
,
2008
.
17.
F.
Huang
,
P.
Liu
,
H.
Yu
, and
W.
Wang
,
Identifying if VISSIM simulation model and SSAM provide reasonable estimates for field measured traffic conflicts at signalized intersections
,
Accid. Anal. Prev.
, vol.
50
, pp.
1014
1024
,
2013
.
18.
“PTV VISSIM 10 user manual,” PTV AG Karlsruhe, Ger.
,
2018
.
19.
D.
Espejel-Garcia
,
J. A.
Saniger-Alba
,
G.
Wenglas-Lara
,
V. V.
Espejel-Garcia
, and
A.
Villalobos-Aragon
, “
A Comparison among Manual and Automatic Calibration Methods in VISSIM in an Expressway (Chihuahua, Mexico
),”
Open J. Civ. Eng.
, vol.
7
, no.
4
, pp.
539
552
,
2017
.
20.
F.
Cunto
and
F. F.
Saccomanno
, “
Calibrating VISSIM to adverse weather conditions
,” In
Proceeding of the 2nd International Conference on Models and Technologies for Intelligent Transportation Systems, (MT-ITS
,
2011
), pp.
22
24
.
21.
B.
Park
and
J. D.
Schneeberger
,
Transp. Res. Rec.
,
185
192
,
1856
(
2003
).
22.
W.
Zhizhou
,
S.
Jian
, and
Y.
Xiaoguang
, “
Calibration of VISSIM for shanghai expressway using genetic algorithm
,” In
Proceedings of the Winter Simulation Conference
, (
IEEE
,
2005
), pp.
4
This content is only available via PDF.
You do not currently have access to this content.