<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="https://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>Transport Research International Documentation (TRID)</title>
    <link>https://trid.trb.org/</link>
    <atom:link href="https://trid.trb.org/Record/RSS?s=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" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
    <description></description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <copyright>Copyright © 2026. National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.</copyright>
    <docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs>
    <managingEditor>tris-trb@nas.edu (Bill McLeod)</managingEditor>
    <webMaster>tris-trb@nas.edu (Bill McLeod)</webMaster>
    
    <item>
      <title>Evaluation of Midblock Pedestrian Signals (MPS)</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/2663287</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This study evaluated the effectiveness of newly implemented Midblock Pedestrian Signals (MPS) in enhancing pedestrian safety, reducing vehicle delays, and minimizing rear-end conflicts, while comparing their performance with other midblock pedestrian crossing treatments such as Pedestrian Hybrid Beacons (PHBs), Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFBs), and Flashing Beacons. Extensive before-and-after CCTV video data were collected from 14 MPS locations and 5 reference sites across Florida. Due to the recent implementation of MPSs, crash data were unavailable; therefore, Surrogate Safety Measures (SSMs) were used. Results showed that MPSs significantly reduced both serious and moderate vehicle-pedestrian conflicts. Although MPS introduced more vehicle delays than RRFB and Flashing Beacon, they performed better than PHB. Rear-end conflict analysis further demonstrated significant safety improvements, particularly at sites upgraded from RRFBs and untreated conditions to MPSs. Driver yielding and pedestrian compliance rates at MPS locations reached approximately 97% and 95%, respectively, demonstrating strong user adaptation. Given their high safety performance, reduced delays compared to PHBs, and strong compliance rates, MPS systems can be considered as a preferred alternative when upgrading existing crossings or installing new pedestrian signal systems.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 20 Feb 2026 08:49:20 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/2663287</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Passive Pedestrian Detection Analysis</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/2533888</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The Passive Pedestrian Detection Analysis project reviewed a variety of commercially available passive detection systems. After vendor selection, the project went through ground-truth testing, pushbutton compliance testing, and vendor result summarization. The objective of the project was to test and verify the accuracy of the selected passive detection systems, provide the Minnesota Department of Transportation with a robust procedure for future testing, and provide an evaluation matrix comparing each tested vendor system.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 07 Apr 2025 09:06:12 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/2533888</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Pedestrian Accessibility and the MUTCD: A Changing Landscape</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/2518165</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The adoption of the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) and Public Right of Way Accessibility Guidelines (PROWAG) will shape pedestrian accessibility of our streets, but their concurrent development led to some inconsistencies and conflicts that can leave designers in the dark. Which guidance should practitioners follow? This article highlights four notable discrepancies related to pedestrian accessibility and offers suggestions for applying the new guidance to projects.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 27 Mar 2025 15:06:21 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/2518165</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Investigating the Impact of Pedestrian Hybrid Beacons on the Effectiveness of Adaptive Traffic Control Systems</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/2521904</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Many transportation agencies have been deploying adaptive traffic control systems (ATCSs) to enhance the efficiency of signalized intersections and arterial networks. However, the benefits of ATCSs vary across roadways due to factors such as traffic volume, network configurations, and the influence of other intelligent transportation systems (ITS). Pedestrian hybrid beacons (PHBs) are ITS utilized as pedestrian control devices, usually deployed between signalized intersections. PHBs can affect the effectiveness of ATCSs and, hence, need to be considered during ATCS deployments and performance evaluations. This study used a corridor in Tucson, Arizona, to evaluate the impact of PHB activations on the travel time along a corridor with an ATCS. Controller event-based data were used to show the effects of the number of PHB activations on ATCS operations. Other factors were also examined, such as traffic volume, number of pushbutton activations at signalized intersections, time of day, and day of the week. The results indicated that travel time increased with PHB activations, especially during morning peaks. Two activations within five minutes showed a 126% (90 s) travel time increase for upstream segments, and three activations saw a 38.5% (27 s) travel time increase for segments with PHB installed. A regression analysis showed a 3.3% and 6.7% travel time increase for each PHB activation every 15 min in upstream segments and segments with PHB installed, respectively. This study’s findings highlight the importance of considering the PHB impact for practitioners selecting ATCS deployment sites for optimal performance.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 25 Mar 2025 16:57:55 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/2521904</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Evaluation of Micromobility User Response: Near Side Dutch-Style Bicycle Signal Countdown Timer</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/2518160</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Signal countdown timers provide transportation users with real-time information about when a traffic signal head will change state. Countdown timers have been used around the world in different forms for various transportation modes, including pedestrians, bicyclists, and vehicles. These devices display the relative time remaining on a signal phase and are intended to help users make safer or more efficient decisions at signalized intersections. The City of Portland in Oregon, USA, installed several Dutch-Style Bicycle Signal Countdown Timers at intersections. The 11th Edition of the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) does not contain guidance that addresses the installation of a near-side Dutch-Style Bicycle Signal. Oregon State University was retained to perform before-after evaluations at select intersections to support the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) request to experiment (RTE). This article present the results of those evaluations.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 25 Mar 2025 09:30:53 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/2518160</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Evaluation of a pedestrian call extension and cancelation system at a signalized midblock crossing</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/2434232</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Unnecessary vehicular delay occurs at actuated signalized intersections during ‘ghost’ pedestrian intervals when a pedestrian activates the pushbutton then jaywalks. Safety issues arise when pedestrians remain in the crosswalk at the end of the Flashing Don’t Walk phase, and vehicles receive a circular green. A Pedestrian Call Extension and Cancelation System was evaluated at a signalized midblock crossing in Hillsboro, OR. Thermal sensors and controller logic were implemented to detect pedestrians and passively cancel or extend calls. A Case 1-after study was conducted to evaluate how vehicular delay and pedestrian behavior was impacted by the system. 1,649 observations Case 1 and 3,002 observations after system installation were recorded. Pedestrian delay did not change, but average vehicular stop time delay significantly decreased by 12?sec. 76 extensions occurred with 99.2% accuracy. Findings suggest that transportation agencies could improve driver waiting time and pedestrian safety by using dynamic passive pedestrian detection.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 17 Oct 2024 09:15:20 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/2434232</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Evaluation of Static and Dynamic No Right Turn on Red Signs at Traffic Signals</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/2394486</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This study examined the operation of static and dynamic no right turn on red (NRTOR) signs at eight signalized intersections in Minnesota (six dynamic and two static). Driver compliance with the NRTOR indications were measured using video data. Most dynamic NRTOR sign locations were pedestrian-activated, with one location having additional time-of-day activation of the NRTOR indication. Compliance rates were calculated per signal cycle and per vehicle. Per-cycle compliance rates were 60.8% for dynamic and 80.0% for static sign locations, while per-vehicle compliance rates were 87.1% for dynamic and 92.4% for static sign locations. Statistical models were further developed to confirm the statistical significance of the results and to explore the strength of the effect compared to other intersection characteristics. A survey of practitioners was included to identify the installation and maintenance costs of DNRTOR devices. The report concludes with recommendations on uses of DNRTOR.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 11 Jul 2024 13:53:12 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/2394486</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Utilizing Traffic Signal Pedestrian Push-Button Data for Pedestrian Planning and Safety Analysis</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/2399768</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Transportation planning, traffic monitoring, and traffic safety analysis require detailed information about pedestrian volumes, but such data are usually lacking. Fortunately, recent research has demonstrated the accuracy of pedestrian volumes estimated from push-button data contained within high-resolution traffic signal controller log data. Such data are available continuously for many locations. This project takes advantage of these novel pedestrian traffic signal data to advance pedestrian traffic monitoring and improve pedestrian traffic safety by applying them as estimates of volume and exposure, often alongside advanced machine learning techniques. Through a series of five studies, the authors identify temporal patterns in pedestrian activity; study the accuracy of pedestrian volume estimation methods over time; use machine learning methods to improve the quality and completeness of pedestrian time-series data; analyze crashes to identify a "safety in numbers" effect for pedestrians; and apply a new deep learning model to better understand factors affecting pedestrian crash severity. Altogether, this work leverages novel pedestrian traffic signal data to further research and efforts in pedestrian traffic monitoring and safety.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 08 Jul 2024 09:08:14 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/2399768</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>User Understanding of Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon Operation</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/2399866</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Understanding drivers’ interaction with different pedestrian hybrid beacon (PHB) phases in the presence or absence of supporting message signs will improve pedestrian safety at road crossings with PHB. The proposed study will involve a robust investigation of driver behavior and understanding related to PHB phasing and supplementary message signs to improve PHB design and driver compliance.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 02 Jul 2024 16:54:53 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/2399866</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Traffic Safety Evaluation of Pedestrians and Bicyclists at Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons and Pedestrian Hybrid Beacons in Minnesota</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/2370943</link>
      <description><![CDATA[To improve the visibility and safety of pedestrian and bicyclist crossings, traffic-safety professionals across Minnesota have installed the Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon (RRFB) and Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon (PHB) at numerous locations around the state. The purpose of this evaluation was to determine the safety benefits, if any, for pedestrians and bicyclists after installation of an RRFB or PHB. This report included a before-after analysis as well as a cross-sectional analysis for each type of beacon with a corresponding group of comparison sites. The before-after analysis found that installation of an RRFB resulted in a 67% decrease in fatal crashes and a 62% decrease in bicyclist crashes. Installation of a PHB resulted in a 53% decrease in suspected minor injury crashes, a 67% decrease in pedestrians crashes, and a 50% decrease in bicyclist crashes. The results of the cross-sectional analysis did not indicate that these reductions were statistically significant compared to similar reductions in the control group. Still, the decreases in severe crashes and crashes involving non-motorists at RRFBs and PHBs indicated that both types of beacons could be effective safety treatments]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 25 Apr 2024 09:32:32 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/2370943</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>BikePed Portal: Pedestrian Volume Estimation Based on Push Button Actuations from Signals Data</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/2361978</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This project translates research from Oregon DOT's "Active transportation counts from existing on-street signal and detection infrastructure" (SPR 857), into a practical application on BikePed Portal. ]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 02 Apr 2024 13:42:35 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/2361978</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Active Transportation Counts from Existing On-Street Signal and Detection Infrastructure</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/2341450</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This study’s objective was to use data from existing traffic signal infrastructure to estimate pedestrian volumes. Pedestrian push-button actuations were collected from signal controller logs at 49 intersections in western Oregon and an additional 16 intersections in eastern Oregon. These actuations were then compared to observed pedestrian counts, totaling over 34,000 people, obtained from video recordings. After exploring various options, a simple quadratic relationship was modeled using a single measure of pedestrian signal activity: the number of push-button presses (filtered to remove multiple presses within 15 seconds). The model’s predictions showed a correlation of 0.86 with observed pedestrian volumes and had an average error of ±2.4 pedestrians per hour. These results suggest that existing traffic signal infrastructure data can be used to estimate pedestrian volumes in Oregon with reasonable accuracy. Using such pedestrian volume estimates can lead to improvements in pedestrian traffic monitoring, safety assessments of exposure, and equity and health analyses.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 20 Feb 2024 09:15:32 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/2341450</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Effect of Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon Signal on Operational Performance Measures at the Mid-block Location and Adjacent Signalized Intersection</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/1974528</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Pedestrian hybrid beacon (PHB) signals, formerly known as High-intensity Activated crossWalK (HAWK) signals, are used at mid-block crosswalk locations to assist pedestrians safely cross high traffic volume/high-speed/multi-lane roads. The PHB signals help decrease pedestrian crashes and increase their safety. However, interrupting the flow of traffic and bringing vehicles to a complete stop at mid-block crosswalk locations could increase delay and reduce operational performance, in particular, along coordinated signal corridors. The reduction in the operational performance may extend to downstream and upstream intersections, making it overall operationally ineffective. This study focuses on evaluating the effect of PHB signals on operational performance measures at the mid-block crosswalk location as well as the adjacent signalized intersection. VISSIM traffic microsimulation software was used to compute the delay and maximum queue length at three different PHB signal locations and their adjacent signalized intersections in Charlotte, North Carolina. The effect of an increase in pedestrian volume and traffic volume on delay and maximum queue length at each PHB signal location and adjacent signalized intersection was studied. Further, the effect of the distance between a PHB signal location and the nearest signalized intersection on delay and maximum queue length was also studied. The findings indicate that a PHB signal location nearer to a signalized intersection has a significant effect on delay and maximum queue length at the signalized intersection. As the distance of the PHB signal location from the signalized intersection increases, delay decreases. Further, an increase in the pedestrian volume and traffic volume will increase delay and maximum queue length at the PHB signal location and adjacent signalized intersection only up to some extent.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 04 Dec 2023 15:45:59 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/1974528</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>PedPal Lite: An ATSC-Independent Safe Intersection Crossing App</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/2292660</link>
      <description><![CDATA[PedPal is a smartphone app designed to assist pedestrians with disabilities in safely crossing signalized intersections, developed originally as part of the Federal Highway Administration’s Accessible Transportation Technology Research Initiative (ATTRI) [1,2].   PedPal interacts directly with the surtrac adaptive traffic signal control (ATSC) system operating at the intersection using real-time traveler-to-infrastructure (T2I) communication and standard DSRC messaging to provide crossing support to its user.  Upon arrival at the intersection, PedPal receives and presents information to its user about the intersection’s geometry, crossing options, and current traffic signal state. When the user indicates her crossing intent, the app then communicates this information to the intersection (eliminating the need to locate and push a pedestrian call button), along with how much time is required by the user to safely cross the intersection. In response to receiving this information, the traffic signal system will set the pedestrian crossing time in the desired direction to ensure that upon getting the crossing signal, the user will receive crossing time that has been requested. More advanced PedPal capabilities include the ability to monitor user crossing progress in real-time, to recognize when the user is traveling slower than expected, and to trigger the traffic control system to dynamically extend the crossing time in such circumstances. The PedPal app is integrated with the smartphone's native accessible features and provides visual, auditory and haptic interaction modalities.   This project focuses on producing a cheaper and more broadly deployable version of PedPal. Whereas the ability exploit surtrac’s real-time ATSC capabilities enable advanced capabilities such as dynamic extension of the current phase duration that enhance safety, its deployment cost to municipalities presents a significant barrier to widespread deployment of the PedPal technology. Furthermore, a recent UTC funded project centered on technology support for the 'complete trip' has expanded the scope of PedPal's capabilities in several new safety-related directions, none of which depend on interaction with surtrac.  To foster more widespread deployment of the PedPal technology, this project will develop and pilot test a stand-alone version of PedPal (referred to as ‘PedPal-Lite’) that will interact directly with the hardware controller at the intersection via an ATSC-independent PedPal intersection manager. This manager will take over responsibility from the Surtrac ATSC system both for broadcasting information about the intersection and the current traffic control state to the smartphone app and for interacting with the traffic controller in response to messages received from the app, exploiting the same underlying T2I connectivity. The manager will run on a low-end processor residing in the cabinet at the intersection and will take advantage of the V2I-hub software module developed under sponsorship of FHWA to generate DSRC formatted messages for broadcast to PedPal users. To maximize deployment potential, the research team will focus integrating the PedPal intersection manager with controllers that support standard NTCIP interaction protocols.  The research team will demonstrate and pilot test the developed PedPal-Lite variant on a TBD intersection near the CMU campus that is running a conventional fixed signal timing plan on a hardware controller that supports the NTCIP standard.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 21 Nov 2023 18:56:38 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/2292660</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Midblock Pedestrian Signal Safety Effectiveness</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/2237107</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The midblock pedestrian signal (MPS) operates as a coordinated actuated vehicular traffic signal that enables pedestrians to cross at midblock. The MPS has been used in multiple locations, including for more than 40 years in Los Angeles. It differs from a typical pedestrian crossing signal by allowing the red display for vehicular traffic to flash at the same time as the pedestrian timing for the crossing, reducing delay to vehicular traffic. The research team built a database of crash and roadway characteristics data for treated and control sites located in three states (California, Utah, and Texas). Three control groups were considered: all control sites (included intersections with two, three, or four legs and traffic control signals); two-leg sites with any type of pedestrian traffic control other than the MPS; and two-leg sites with nonactive or not present pedestrian traffic control devices. It was found that the MPS is associated with a reduction in the number of crashes involving pedestrians and a reduction in the number of all fatal and injury crashes when the control group is two-leg sites with nonactive or not present pedestrian traffic control devices. The following crash modification factors for the MPS were identified: 0.554 for crashes involving pedestrians; and 0.660 for all crashes.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 31 Aug 2023 09:32:19 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/2237107</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>