Construction of the Evaluation System for Regional
Road Traffic Safety and Application Based on A
Grey Integrated Evaluation Model
Binru Cao, Yong Liu
School of Business, Jiangnan University
Wuxi ,214122, China
e-mail: caobr@sina.com
cllyI985528@163.com
Abstract-It is the basis for making analysis of the status quo
and implementing effectively road traffic safety management to
launch the evaluation for regional road traffic safety, while the
construction of scientific and effective evaluation system is the
prerequisite of carrying out the evaluation. In order to provide a
method for the evaluation for regional road traffic safety, a grey
integrated evaluation model is exploited to investigate
scientific and effective evaluation system for regional road traffic
safety. In this paper, the grey incidence feature vector method
and grey incidence analysis are, respectively utilized to construct
an evaluation index system for regional road traffic safety, and
determine the index weights and then grey clustering and grey
incidence. The ideal point method is used to establish a novel
evaluation model of regional road traffic safety. Finally, the
regional road traffic safety for 31 provinces and cities in china
are investigated to illustrate the feasibility and effectiveness of
the proposed model, and provide the basis of making analysis of
the present situation and the difference for the provinces and
cities in China. Based on the analysis of the model and case, the
results show that the proposed model does not only realize the
categorizations of regional security, but also the comparison and
ranking for the evaluated regions in the same category.
Keywords-Grey incidence analysis, variable weight
clustering; grey integrated evaluation; evaluation of road traffic
safety
I. INTRODUCTION
In the 21st century, more and more people have been
drawing attention to road safety problems, however to curb
road traffic accidents and ease the pressure on road traffic
safety is still a daunting task [1]. Being the most populous
developing country, Chinese government attaches great
importance to road safety, and then a series of policies and
measures are taken to strengthen road traffic safety
management, for example, the "Long-term Scientific and
Technological Development (2006-2020)", promulgated and
implemented in 2006. Although the situation of Chinese road
safety has improved and the number of road traffic accidents
and the death toll have declined in recent years, road traffic
safety problem is still very grim. The reinforcement of traffic
safety management is in urgent need to reduce the incidence
978-1-4799-8375-9/15/$31.00 ©2015 IEEE
Wu-yong Qian, Yu-hong Wang
School of Business, Jiangnan University
Wuxi 214122, China
e-mail: qianyijiaemail@163.com
yuhongwang@jiangnan.edu.cn
rate of road traffic accidents and protect the general public
safety, whose core is to establish a scientific and effective
technology system of evaluation, prediction and decision­
making. Therefore, the establishment of a scientific evaluation
technology of road traffic safety has become a much more
important problem to be solved.
the
Regional road traffic safety evaluation has aroused
widespread concern and attention, and more and more experts
and scholars have been making systematical researchers on the
related important issues involved in the area of road traffic
safety evaluation. For the researches on road traffic safety
evaluation, there are mainly three aspects of the analysis of
influencing factors, the construction of index system, and
evaluation methods. For the first aspect, from different angles,
some factors are extracted and discovered. Some scholars
regarded that roads, traffic levels, weather conditions, and the
behaviors of traffic participants are the main factors affecting
road traffic safety [2]. By analyzing the factors of affecting
road traffic safety in Egypt, Khaled found that the driver,
pedestrians, vehicles, roads, environment and other factors are
the main factors affecting the area of road safety [3]. Based on
grey empirical research, the factors of affecting road traffic safety
mainly consist of speed limits [4], cultural differences [5], user
type, impact angle, impact speed [6] and road traffic safety
education [7]. For the related studies on the construction of
index systems, some experts thought that the indexes such as
road traffic safety, people, vehicles, roads, environment and
regulations, the number of accidents and other factors should
be considered to establish index systems [8]. Whereas, some
scholars construct different index systems such as the three
dimension index system based on the number [9], accident
severity and the likelihood of accidents [10], the evaluation
index system of regional road accident with the road traffic
accident risk factor [11], the proportion of the road traffic
deaths [12] and other indicators [13]. The road safety
evaluation system based on the violation behaviors of motor
vehicle driver, road conditions, vehicle composition and other
factors [14], and other index systems [15]. For the evaluation
methods of road traffic safety, there mainly exist grey systems,
fuzzy comprehensive evaluation methods [16], regression
analysis, cluster analysis and structural equation [17].
395 GSTS2015
 Based on the above discussion, by combing and making indexes may to some extent take on information overlapping,
analysis of the relevant researches, the researches could so that some non-critical indexes should be deleted to produce
provide relatively strong support for regional road traffic a simple and effective index system. In view of this, grey
safety evaluation. However, there exist some shortcomings in incidence feature vector method is exploited to reduce the
the existing works, which take on two aspects. On the one indexes, and its steps are as follows:
hand, the strength and devastation of the accident is mainly
Suppose that there exist m evaluated regions
considered to design the index system is established, while the
and n evaluation indexes, and they can be respectively denoted
factors such as environment, management level and risk
prevention of regional road traffic often are ignored, and the AI'A2,... ,Am ...
and �,�, , p" , while a'l stands for the
method of filtering the evaluation indexes should be further observation value of the evaluated region i with respect to the
strengthened. On the other hand, it is difficult for the existing
index} .
evaluation methods to effectively achieve classification
evaluation on road traffic safety, so that a novel evaluation Step 1. Make non-dimensional treatment over the
method should be established to classify the evaluated areas indexes. Because different dimensions have significant impact
and make the rankings of the evaluated areas for the same on the quality of modeling and the results of system evaluation,
class.
the indexes should be implemented dimensionless.
Regional road system is a uncertain system affected by If alj is the efficiency index (the bigger the index value is,
multi-factor, while grey system theory being a powerful tool
can effectively deal with and analyze uncertain systems [18]. the better the index is), then it could be treated as follows:
With respect to the shortcomings of the existing works, grey a' -mma;l
l ,
systems is suitable for constructing the evaluation system, xlJ = . (1)
which focus on designing the index system of regional road maxa -mina
lJ i lJ
traffic safety, solving evaluation index weights and
establishing an integrated assessment model. If alj is the based- cost index alj (the less the index value
is, the better the index is), it can be transformed as follows:
11. THE CONSTRUCTION OF EVALUATION INDEX SYSTEM OF maxa; -ai
l l
.
REGIONAL ROAD TRAFFIC SAFETY
X lJ
= I
maxa -mina
. (2)
lJ i lJ
A. The design o{regional road traffic safety evaluation index
system Step 2. Assume that the observation sequence of the

The regional road transport system is an organic whole evaluated regions Ai with respect to the evaluation index 1 the
sequences of the evaluated regions Ai with
composed of people, vehicles, roads, natural conditions and
observation
many other elements by the interrelation, and then these
elements are also the major factors impacted on road safety. respect to the evaluation indexes can be respectively the
Therefore, it can be seen that the influencing factors of the features action sequence and factors sequences, and they can
regional road safety are more complex. On the basis of the be expressed as follows:
existing research (MA She qiang, 2011), combined with the
influencing factors of road traffic safety, from the aspects of
X o = {XIO,X2o,,··,Xmo}
the number of traffic accidents and losses, degree of risk for X I = {Xll,X21,,··,Xm l}
traffic accident, level of economic development, traffic
environment and traffic capacity, risk prevention of traffic, a
six dimensions index system of road traffic safety is
established, and its first and second level indexes level indexes Xn = {Xlm,X2m'···'Xmm }
are shown in Table 1. Based on grey incidence analysis, the grey incidence
degree between the index i and the index 1 with respect to }
Table I evaluation index system of regional road traffic safety can be obtained as follows:
Firstlcvcl Second level indexes Index code

n;in mjn Ixjo -Xji I + pm� mr lXjO -Xji I

indexes
The ll\unbcr The ll\unbcr of accidents x,
of traffic The number of deaths X,
X,
accidents and The number of injuries
X, r(xjO'Xji) = (3)
IXjO -Xji I + p�mrx IXjO -Xii I
losses Direct ropeTl.\' loss
The degree of The mortalitv rale peT thousand vehicle
Evaluation risk for traffic The mortalitv rale per I ()()OOO men
index
accident The ll\unbcr of lrafTic accidcnls(dcalh number is more Uk111 3)
system of
regional
The level of The total amount of re'iona} economic Where, P stands for the distinguishing coefficient, and is
cconOllnc Re 'iona} per capita GDP
road traffic
safely
development Re'ional economic 'rowth rate
often taken as 0.5[18].
Traffic Hi'hwav milea'e
em'iromnent
and traffic
turnover of frei 'It traffic
The volume of Motor vehicle
Accordingly, the grey incidence degree between the index
capacity The drivin' number of i and index 1 can be calculated:
Risk Penetmtion rate of traffic safetv education
prevention of
tmffic Control t level of the road x,-

The primary indexes are much more, and there may be (4)
some correlation among the indexes, thus the data of the

396
 Then, the grey incidence degree between the each index related factor sequences and denoted as
and index 1 can be obtained as follows:
1 1 1 Xi {x/l),xj(2),...,x/m)},j 1,2,···,n.
= =

r1 ,r2 , • • ·,rn Step 2.Make normalization to the indexes.

Where, r i1 delegates the grey incidence degree between Step 3 Calculate the grey incidence degrees between X J

the each index i and index 1. and Xo ' and they are as follows:
Similar to the above method, grey incidence degrees
between the each index i and the index 2,3, ... ,n can be y(X"Xo) =-
1
Ly(xo(k),x/k))
m
(6)
calculated, so that the grey incidence matrix can be obtained m k=l

as follows: Where, . minminlxo(k)-x I (k)l+pmaxmaxlxo(k)-x

k . . I (k)1
y(xo(k),xj(k)) = J j
.
I
r,l1 r2l rnl
I xo(k)-xj(k)I +pmfxmjlxI xo(k)-xj(k)I
2 2 2 Make normalization processing of yex}, Xo), and then
R=
r1 r2 rn (5) the index weight can be obtained as follows:

n n n (j)
y(Xi,XO)
= ---"----
(7)
1j r2 rn } n

Step 3. Calculate the characteristic roots A i of R , and

select the smallest characteristic value Amin . If Amin is not
close to zero, then the index set is the optimal index set;
otherwise, the feature vector RA,nin indicates
contribution of its principal component to the overall is the
least (almost no contribution), so that the index of the largest
component in the feature vector should be deleted, and then a
novel index set is produced;
Step 4. Repeat step 2 and step 3;
Based on the above method, the reduction index set can
be obtained and denoted as l1., Pz ... , P;, .
'
B. The index weights of regional road traffic safety based on
grey incidence analysis
The index weights have a significant influence and effect
on the evaluation results, so that scientifically and reasonably
assigning index weights is the basis of carrying out scientific
evaluation. Currently, there are the expert scoring method,
AHP, entropy method and others to determine the index
weights. In order to determine index weights, grey incidence
analysis is exploited to propose a subjective and objective
technique, and its basic idea is that the index greatest impact
on evaluation based on the expert research and consulting is
selected to be as a benchmark index, and then the grey
incidence degrees between the benchmark index and the other
indexes can be obtained to determine the index weights. The
empowerment idea shows that if the incidence between the
index and the most important index is bigger, the index should
be given greater weight, and vice versa [18].
The basic steps of the method are as follows:
Step 1. Determine benchmark index and compared
indexes. The index greatest impact on evaluation is selected as
a benchmark index, and the index value vector of the
benchmark index could be the characteristic behavior
sequence and denoted as = Xo {xo(1),xo(2),··,xo(m)}
,
while the sequences of the other index value could be the
LY(Xj'Xo)
Accordingly, the index vector can be
that the
Ill. A REGIONAL ROAD TRAFFIC SAFETY EVALUATION MODEL
BASED ON GREY INTEGRATED EVALUATION MODEL
For the evaluation model based on grey whitening
clustering method to evaluate regional road safety, there exist
some shortcomings of difficultly comparing the size, and pros
and cons between regions in the same grey class. In view of
this, the thought of grey whitening clustering and grey
incidence analysis is utilized to establish a grey integrated
evaluation model of regional road safety. It's the basic
modeling idea that grey whitening clustering method is firstly
used to classify the regions of road safety, and then TOPSIS
and grey incidence analysis is utilized to construct a regional
road traffic safety evaluation model.
A. Rating model of regional road traffic safety based on
whitening weight grey clustering
Whitening weight grey clustering is a way of dividing
some observed objects into definable categories by whitening
weight grey clustering function. Its basic principle is; based on
multiple index values of the characteristics of the observed
object, each evaluated object belonging to the clustering
coefficient for each grey subclass is calculated, and then
identify grey classes of the observed object based on the
maximum principle of clustering coefficient. According to the
method of determining the weights, whitening weight grey
clustering can be divided into variable weight grey clustering
and fixed weight grey clustering. The variable weight grey
clustering can cause the role of some indicators to become
very weak, therefore, the paper uses a fixed weight grey
clustering method to evaluate regional road traffic safety.
Relevant concepts and definitions involved in the fixed grey
weight clustering are as follows:
Definition 1 [18] suppose that there exist m clustering
objects, n clustering indexes and s grey classes,

397
and xij(i = 1,2,···,m;j = 1,2,···,n) stands for the 11k(-) and lJJ respectively delegates the whitening weight
observation values of object i with respect to the index j ,if function and the weight of the index j with respect to the
i
the object is classified into the grey class k(k 1,2,..., s ) ,
=
subclass k, then
then it is called as grey clustering; accordingly, if the values of m

the m objects with respect to the indexesj are divided into s cyik II/(xu)lJ:
= (8)
i�l
grey classes, then it is called as the subclasses of the indexj .
(Jj
( / } /" )
u ,u , ... , u

1/ (-)
==

Definition 2 [18] suppose that delegates the m m m (9)

whitening weight function of the indexj with respect to the = (If}(Xij). 77�, If/(xij). 77� , ..., If/(xij). 77;)
/=1 /=1 /=1
subclass k shown in Fig.l, and 1/ (-) is called as a typical CY1
I 2
CY1 CY1
s

whitening weight function, and X� (1), x� (2), I 2 s

CY2 CY2 CY2 (10)
x� (3), x� (4) are called as the turning points of If (-) .
2
if 1/ (-) does not have the first and second turning points as
I s
CYn CYn CYn
shown in Fig 2, then it is called as the limit measure whitening is respectively called as variable weight grey clustering
weight function. If the second and third turning points are i
coefficient of the object with respect to grey class, clustering
coincident as shown in Fig 3, then it is called the moderate coefficient vector of object and the clustering coefficient
measure whitening weight function. If the third and fourth matrix.
turning points have are not, as in shown in Fig 4, then it is
called the lower limit measure whitening weight function.
For definition 4, if��� {cyik} cyik" , then the grey class
=

of the region i can be deemed as k * .

According to the characteristics of the regional road traffic

safety evaluation, the specific steps of regional road traffic
safety evaluation based on the fixed weight grey clustering
method are as follows:
Step 1: The observation matrix of the evaluation object
with respect to each index can be determined, and then they
are made non-dimensional treatment.
Step 2: Each grey class and their feature values are
determined. There exist three level of regional road safety
which are high security, general security and less security. The
corresponding points of cumulative percentage frequency are:
25%, 50%, 75%, and respectively determine the feature values
of three grey classes.
Step 3: The whitening weight functions are determined.
For the efficiency index, the lower limit measure whitening
weight function could be chosen. For the based -cost index,
the upper limit measure whitening weight function can be used.
For the interval index, the moderate measure whitening weight
function can be selected. According to the step 2, the turning
Definition 3 (Liu and Lin 2011) suppose that 1/ (-) points can be obtained.
Step 4: according to the weight and whitening weight

delegates the whitening weight function, iflJ J has nothing to function, the clustering coefficient can be determined, and
then the grey fixed weight grey clustering coefficient can be
111
m
do with k , then cyik IIf (Xu )lJJ is
= called as the fixed obtained as follows: cy;k IOJ}It (Xu )lJ : .
=

}�I i�l
weight grey clustering coefficient of the indexj with respect
Step 5: according to max { CY k} k ' , the grey class of
to the subclass k. 1"k,,4 CY I
=
I

Definition 4 [18] suppose that xij stands for the the region i can be determined as k * .

i
observation values of object with respect to the indexj , and

398
B. Regional road safety evaluation model based on grey By non-dimensional treatment over the data in Table 2, a
incidence analysis and TOPSIS standardized data matrix is obtained and shown in Table 3.
Because the grey whitening clustering method only According to the data in Table 3, grey incidence - the
achieves the classification of grey class, and the difficulty feature vector method is used to carry out the reduction for the
gives the comparisons and rankings over the regions, so that a index set, and the grey incidence matrix between each index is
novel method based grey whitening clustering method should calculated and shown in Table 4.
be constructed. Tn this paper, grey incidence and the ideal
point method is used to establish a novel evaluation model to The minimization feature value of the above matrix is not
evaluate regional road traffic safety, and its basic idea and zero, so the initial index system is the best index system,
steps are as follows: without excluding relevant indexes. Grey incidence analysis is
used to determine the weight of each index shown in Table 5.
Supposed that the index observation value matrix of the
evaluated regions and its matrix after the standardization of
Table 5 Index weight table
data processmg IS respectively X =(Xu)mxn and
x, x4 x, x7 x,
index
Y -
- (yU )mxn and the index weight vector

OJ={OJpOJ2,"··,OJn}T
weight 0.066 0.062 0.065 0.062 0.058 0.059 0.056 0.060 0.058
is and then the weighted
X10 XII Xu Xu X14 Xl5 X'6 X17
index
standardization matrix can be obtained as follows:
V =(vlj)mxn=(OJJYu)mxn weight 0.060 0.048 0.053 0.061 0.061 0.059 0.056 0.057

The maximal values and minimum values of each index Based on the cumulative percentage frequency method, the
from all the evaluated regions can be respectively selected to feature values can be determined. For example, according to
constitute the positive ideal and negative ideal solution vector, the distribution of the first evaluation index values, the feature
and respectively denoted as follows: values of the three grey classes are respectively determined
0.76, 0.86, 0.9, and then the whitening weight functions of the
V+ = {VI+' v; ,..., Vl� } = { aVI+' w2Y; ,..., wnY:} (11) first evaluation index with respect to three grey classes are
respectively as follows:
v- = {v;, v�,"', Vl�} = {wIY;, W2Y�'''', WnY�} (12)
1 1,x:?:0.9
Where,
x-O.86
y; = {(�i�;YU Ii is efficiency index) , (���yu Ii iscost index)} 1
f. (x) =
0.9-0.86
,xE[0.86,0.9],
y7 = {I\bminJ.:S:/IJY',i Ii is efficiency index) , I\ y, Ii is t index)}
max
1:$;,::;/11 J
o,x < 0.86
The positive and negative grey incidence degree between 1 1,x:?:0.9
the evaluated region i, and the positive ideal and negative ideal
2 x-O.86
f. (x) = ,xE[0.86,0.9],
region can be respectively acquired as follows:
0.9-0.86
ri+ = r(�,V+) = � -Ir(vU' vt) (13) o,x < 0.86
n j�l

I
n
ri- = r(� , v -) = - Lr(Vi.i' Vi-)
n j�l
(14) 0,x � [0,0.86]
Based on the positive and negative grey incidence degree, f. \x) = 1,xE[0,0.76]
0.86-x
the relative closeness degree of the evaluated region i can be
---- ,xE[0.76,0.86]
obtained as follows: 0.86-0.76
Similarly, the whitening weight functions of other indexes
c* rt (15) can be obtained. Based on the fixed weight grey clustering
, rt+ri- method, 31 provinces can be classified into the grey classes,
According to the size of the relative closeness degree, the and then the results can be obtained and shown in Table 6.
evaluated regions can be ranked.
According to the Table 6, it is well known that the level of
road traffic safety for the first grey class is high, and other
IV. CHINA ROAD TRAFFIC SAFETY EVALUATION - BASED ON provinces except Guangdong, Zhejiang and Fujian belong to
PROVINCIAL DATA economically underdeveloped areas, but they possess better
According to the data from China's 31 provinces in 2009, road traffic safety situation and level as a result of the fact that
the proposed model is exploited to make assessments on road the levels of urbanization and motorization are lower. Also,
traffic safety. The index values of road traffic safety their number of motor vehicles are far lower than other
evaluation are shown in Table 2. economically developed provinces, and there exist mountains
accounted for a larger proportion in these provinces and their

399
traffic is not very convenient, which makes the demand and
transport of road traffic much lower than other regions. For the
provinces in the second grey class, the levels of their road
traffic safety are general, and their economic development
level are also located at the lower-middle level. This takes on
certain relevance between the traffic safety level and their
economic development. For the provinces in the third grey
class, their levels of road traffic safety are low, but they
belong to the economically developed areas, which result from
the higher urbanization level, motorization level, larger road
traffic demand, higher possibility of road traffic accidents, and
the increasing frequency of road traffic accidents.
In order to better compare the differences on road traffic
safety of each province in different grey classes, grey
incidence - ideal point method is used to calculate evaluation
values from each province, and then the ranking results can be
obtained. For the provinces in the first grey class, the ranking
relationship of regional road safety evaluation can be given as
follows: Shanxi >- Tibet >- Zhejiang >- Fujian >- Gansu >­
Qinghai >- Xinjiang >- Guizhou >- Hainan >­
Guangdong >- Sichuan >- Yunnan; For the provinces in the
second grey class, the ranking is following
Hebei >- Hubei >- Liaoning >- Tianjin >- Jiangsu >- Beijing >­
Shandong>- Henan>- Shanghai within the second grey class;
accordingly, the ranking of the provinces in the third grey
class can be determined as follows: Ningxia >- Jilin >­
Anhui >- Shaanxi >- Guangxi >- Jiangxi >- Tnner
Mongolia>- Hunan>- Chongqing>- Heilongjiang.
V. CONCLUSIONS
This paper focuses on the construction of a regional road
safety evaluation system and grey integrated evaluation model.
Based on the proposed evaluation system and model, the
regional road traffic safety situations from China's 31
provinces in 2009 are analyzed and assessed, and the results
show that regional road traffic safety does not support the
positive correlations with the regional economic development
level. While the road traffic safety situations for the more
mountainous provinces are much better, and the road traffic
safety situations for economically developed areas are lower,
which is conformed with the spatial distribution situation of
regional road traffic accidents in china.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
This work is partially funded by National Natural Science
Foundation of China (71301064), the key project of the
National Social Science Fund (12AZDlll); the Ministry of
education of Humanities and Social Science Youth Fund
Project (13YJC630120); Jiangsu Province University
Philosophy and Social Sciences for Key Research Program
400
(2013ZDlXMO 19); The research base of Chinese lOT
development strategy(133930).
REFERENCES
[I] Andreassen ,D. Population and Registered Vehicle Data vs Road Deaths.
Accident Analysis and Prevention, 1991(23):343-35l.
[2] Jagadishi Guria. An Economic Evaluation of Incremental Resources to
Road Safety Programmes in New Zealand. Accident Analysis and
Prevention ,1999(31):91-99.
[3] Khaled A. Abbas. Traffic Safety Assessment and Development of
Predictive Model for Accidents on Rural roads in Egypt. Accident
Analysis and Prevention ,2004(36):149-163.
[4] Chris Lee, Bruce Helling, Frank Saccomanno. Evaluation of Variable
Speed Limits to Improve Traffic Safety. Transportation Research (Part
C), 2006(14):213-228.
[5] Ingunn Olea Lund, Torbn Rundmo. Cross-cultural Comparisons of
Traffic Safety, Risk Perception, Attitudes and Behaviour. Saftey Science,
2009(47):547-553.
[6] Aliaksei Laureshyn, Ase Svensson. Christer Hyden. Evaluation of
Traffic Safety ,based on Micro-level Behavioural Data: Theoretical
Framework and First Implementation. Accident Analysis and
Prevention , 2010(42):1637-1646.
[7] Khuat Viet Hung, Le Thu Huyen. Education Influence in Traffic Safety:
A Case Study in Vietnam. IATSS Research, 2011(34):87-93.
[8] Jiang W L, Lu F, Han F X. Needs Analysis of Road Traffic Safety
Assessment. Chinese People's Public Security University (Natural
Science), 2005(4): 59-6l.
[9] Zhu S Y, Wang H, Yan X P. A kind of F-AHP Mehod to
Macroscopically Evaluated Road Traffic Safety. Journal of Wuhan
University of Technology, 2005,29(5):697-699.
[10] XU B, Zhou J X, Zhu M. Research on Road Traffic Safety by Fuzzy
Comprehensive Evaluation. Science Technology and Engineering, 2009,
9(6):1647-165l.
[11] MA She-qiang, SHAO Chun-fun, LIU Dong et al. Road traffic safety
evaluation method based on discrepancy-driven theory. Journal of Jinlin
University (Engineering and Technology Edition), 2014, 40(4):981-985.
[12] Ma S Q, Shao C F, Zuo Z Y, ,et al. Comprehensive Evaluation of
Regional Road Traffic Safety Based on Principal Component Analysis
and Cluster Analysis. Journal of Wuhan University of Technology
(Transportation Science & Engineering ) , 20I0, 34(6)1090-1094.
[13] Liu W C, Lan Q, Li Y B etl. A new Comprehensive Evaluation
Approach to Road Traffic Safety. Journal of Tansportation Engineering
and Information, 2011,9(2):I02-106.
[14] Qiong Bao, Da Ruan, Yongjun Shen, Elke Hermans, Davy Janssens.
Improced Hierachical Fuzzy TOPSIS for Safety Performance Evaluation.
Knowledge-Based Systems,2011
[15] Zhuanglin Ma, Chunfu Shao, Sheqiang Ma, Zeng Yeo Constructing road
safety performance indicators using Fuzzy Delphi Method and Grey
Delphi Method. Expert Systems with Applications ,2011 (38):1509-1514.
[16] Bhagwant Persauda ,Bo Lana, Craig Lyona, Ravi Bhimb. Comparision
of Empirical Bayes and Full Bayes Approaches for before-after Road
Safety Evaluations.Accident Analysis and Prevention ,2010(42):38-43.
[17] Anesh Sukhai, Andrew PJones, Barnaby S.Love, Robin Haynes.
Temporal Variation in Road Traffic Fatalities in South Africa. Accident
Analysis and Prevention , 2011,(43):421-428.
[18] Liu S F, and Lin Y. Grey Information Theory and Practical Applications,
London: Springer-Verlag,2011
 Table 2.The index values of road traffic safety evaluation from China's 31 provinces of in 2009

X, x, X, X4 Xs Xc, X7 Xx X, X10 X" X" Xu Xl4 XIS X" X"

Beijing 3814 981 4426 2054 2.51 5.79 12 12153 22154 10.1 20755 732 390.59 586.27 99.6 2.75 23.1

Tlanjin 3839 945 4608 2256 6.07 8.04 28 7522 15149 16.5 14316 9607 155.73 238.81 99.5 3.07 27.7

Hebei 6802 2766 7422 4452 2.2 3.96 30 17235 7193 10 152135 6405 1255.2 1082.7 99.2 4.88 6.4

Shanxi 7697 2773 8829 3501 7.33 8.13 52 7358 6854 6.01 127330 2390 378.1 439.57 99.1 4.08 4.25

Inner Mongolia I 4166 1 1440 1 4632 1529 3.52 5.97 1 54 9740 9668 16.9 1 150756 4117 1 408.66 1 386.08 99 7.49 1 3.59

Liaoning 6973 2156 6657 3146 4.54 5 18 15212 10848 13.1 101117 7754 474.37 674.28 99.3 3.2 1 1 .3

Jilin 5277 1483 6313 2261 4.21 5.42 31 7279 8410 13.3 88430 1167 352.57 477.68 99.3 3.43 7.34

Heilongjiang 3331 1419 3638 2110 4.77 3.71 40 8587 7737 1 1 .1 151470 1645 297.48 484.87 99.5 4.45 6.12

Shanghai 2831 1042 2702 1216 4.27 5.52 10 15046 29572 8.2 11671 14373 244.27 410.92 99.8 3.81 27.4

Jiangsu 14542 5202 13997 5497 3.83 6.78 40 34457 11993 12.4 143803 4675 1357.4 1460.9 99.7 7.24 17.3

Zhejiang 23391 5689 25489 8847 5.66 ILl 43 22990 15790 8.9 106952 5660 1005.2 1014.7 99.8 8.06 12.1

Anhui 8191 2931 10307 2427 3.36 4.35 56 10063 6829 12.9 149184 6322 872.37 661.7 99.3 13.4 6.12

Fujian 13633 2911 16247 4687 4.36 8.08 71 12237 10950 12 89504 2471 668.1 632.89 99.5 8.47 6.65

Jiangxi 4262 1644 5163 3921 3.14 3.74 50 7655 6229 13.1 137011 2334 524.3 639.29 99.4 4.96 3.73

Shandong 16166 4518 16948 5616 2.38 4.8 64 33897 10494 1 1 .9 226693 11022 1899.8 1590.6 99.6 7.5 12

Henan 8587 2018 10159 3303 1.31 2.03 30 19480 6607 10.7 2423 14 6154 1546.3 1541.6 99.4 6.59 3.59

Hubei 6630 1952 8201 2850 2.82 3.42 40 12961 7791 13.2 197196 2566 692.97 789.51 99.5 7.81 6.44

Hunan 7444 2154 10082 3822 3.8 3.15 38 13060 7929 13.6 191405 2513 566.34 620.81 99.2 5.04 4.11

Guangdong 32455 6542 38598 8553 3.67 6.85 84 39483 15291 9.5 184960 4770 1782.5 1962.4 99.8 3.63 14.5

Guangxi 5196 2437 6504 1863 3.29 4.83 74 7759 6893 13.9 100491 2337 74Ll2 747.76 99.6 5.06 5.61

Hainan 1323 499 1873 3996 3.8 5.84 11 1654 6695 11.7 20041 793 131.21 114.02 99.5 7.8 6.49

Chongqing 5992 1031 9178 1048 5.13 3.63 12 6530 8308 14.9 110950 1650 200.79 267.47 99.4 7.13 4.22

Sichuan 21680 3057 25179 5670 3.66 3.76 58 14151 6863 14.5 249168 1591 835.97 1032.3 99.7 9.17 3.52

Guizhou 1816 1210 2606 1214 5.22 3.19 78 3913 5044 8.1 142561 926 231.76 294.92 99.6 13.2 1.54

Yunnan 5075 1888 6549 2372 3.06 4.16 64 6170 5926 12.1 206028 868 617.19 635.31 99.4 13.7 1.66

Tibet 678 369 748 585 8.38 12.9 17 441 4060 12.1 53845 35 20.07 20.99 99.5 39.6 0.59

Shanxi 5501 2034 5404 2989 5.43 5.41 31 8170 7069 13.6 144109 2219 374.91 506.51 99.6 7.2 3.1

Gansu 2937 1553 3353 1225 8.72 5.91 63 3388 5284 9.7 114000 1619 178.04 201.42 99.5 15.9 2.82

Qinghai 1146 578 1334 393 10.9 10.4 21 1081 6495 9.8 60136 364 530.8 73.43 99.6 14.7 1.13

Ningxia 1856 457 2192 534 3.57 7.4 16 1353 7858 1 1 .6 21805 750 127.86 95.93 99.7 9.89 6.88

Xinjiang 5120 2080 5787 996 7.6 9.76 40 4277 5990 8.1 150683 1256 273.77 290.86 99.6 3.4 3.17

(Data Sources: The dates m Table 2 are collected from road accIdent statIstics and Chma StatistIcal Yearbook of People's Republtc of Chma)

401
 Table 3 the non-dimensional treatment for index values of road traffic safety evaluation from 2009 year

XI X, X, X4 X, X6 X7 Xx X, X10 XII Xu Xu X14 XIS Xl6 XI7

Beijing 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.80 0.88 0.65 0.97 0.30 0.71 0.38 0.04 0.05 0.20 0.29 0.74 1.00 0.83

Tianjin 0.90 0.91 0.90 0.78 0.50 0.44 0.76 0.18 0.43 0.96 0.01 0.67 0.07 0.11 0.62 0.99 1.00

Hebei 0.81 0.61 0.82 0.52 0.91 0.82 0.73 0.43 0.12 0.37 0.59 0.44 0.66 0.55 0.23 0.94 0.21

Shanxi 0.78 0.61 0.79 0.63 0.37 0.44 0.43 0.18 0.11 0.00 0.49 0.16 0.19 0.22 0.10 0.96 0.14

TnneT-
0.89 0.83 0.90 0.87 0.77 0.64 0.41 0.24 0.22 1.00 0.59 0.28 0.21 0.19 0.00 0.87 0.11
Mongolia

Liaoning 0.80 0.71 0.84 0.67 0.66 0.73 0.89 0.38 0.27 0.65 0.38 0.54 0.24 0.34 0.36 0.99 0.39

Jilin 0.86 0.82 0.85 0.78 0.70 0.69 0.72 0.18 0.17 0.67 0.32 0.08 0.18 0.24 0.36 0.98 0.25

Hei10ngjia
0.92 0.83 0.92 0.80 0.64 0.84 0.59 0.21 0.14 0.47 0.59 0.11 0.15 0.24 0.62 0.95 0.20
ng

Shanghai 0.93 0.89 0.95 0.90 0.69 0.68 1.00 0.37 1.00 0.20 0.00 1.00 0.12 0.20 1.00 0.97 0.99

Jiangsu 0.56 0.22 0.65 0.40 0.74 0.56 0.59 0.87 0.31 0.59 0.56 0.32 0.71 0.74 0.87 0.88 0.62

Zhejiang 0.29 0.14 0.35 0.00 0.55 0.16 0.55 0.58 0.46 0.27 0.40 0.39 0.52 0.51 1.00 0.85 0.43

Anhui 0.76 0.58 0.75 0.76 0.79 0.79 0.38 0.25 0.11 0.63 0.58 0.44 0.45 0.33 0.36 0.71 0.20

Fujian 0.59 0.59 0.59 0.49 0.68 0.44 0.18 0.30 0.27 0.55 0.33 0.17 0.34 0.32 0.62 0.84 0.22

Jiangxi 0.89 0.79 0.88 0.58 0.81 0.84 0.46 0.18 0.09 0.65 0.53 0.16 0.27 0.32 0.49 0.94 0.12

Shandong 0.51 0.33 0.57 0.38 0.89 0.74 0.27 0.86 0.25 0.54 0.91 0.77 1.00 0.81 0.74 0.87 0.42

Henan 0.75 0.73 0.75 0.66 1.00 1.00 0.73 0.49 0.10 0.43 0.97 0.43 0.81 0.78 0.49 0.89 0.11

Hubei 0.81 0.74 0.80 0.71 0.84 0.87 0.59 0.32 0.15 0.66 0.78 0.18 0.36 0.40 0.62 0.86 0.22

Hunan 0.79 0.71 0.75 0.59 0.74 0.90 0.62 0.32 0.15 0.70 0.76 0.17 0.29 0.31 0.23 0.94 0.13

Guangdon
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.75 0.55 0.00 1.00 0.44 0.32 0.73 0.33 0.94 1.00 1.00 0.97 0.51
g

Guangxi 0.86 0.66 0.85 0.83 0.79 0.74 0.14 0.19 0.11 0.72 0.37 0.16 0.38 0.37 0.74 0.94 0.19

Hainan 0.98 0.98 0.97 0.57 0.74 0.65 0.99 0.03 0.10 0.52 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.05 0.62 0.86 0.22

Chongqin
0.83 0.89 0.78 0.92 0.60 0.85 0.97 0.16 0.17 0.82 0.42 0.11 0.10 0.13 0.49 0.88 0.13
g

Sichuan 0.34 0.56 0.35 0.38 0.76 0.84 0.35 0.35 0.11 0.78 1.00 0.11 0.43 0.52 0.87 0.82 0.11

Guizhou 0.96 0.86 0.95 0.90 0.59 0.89 0.08 0.09 0.04 0.19 0.55 0.06 0.11 0.14 0.74 0.72 0.04

Yunnan 0.86 0.75 0.85 0.77 0.82 0.80 0.27 0.15 0.07 0.56 0.82 0.06 0.32 0.32 0.49 0.70 0.04

Tibet 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 0.26 0.00 0.91 0.00 0.00 0.56 0.18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.62 0.00 0.00

Shanxi 0.85 0.73 0.88 0.69 0.57 0.69 0.72 0.20 0.12 0.70 0.56 0.15 0.19 0.25 0.74 0.88 0.09

Gansu 0.93 0.81 0.93 0.90 0.23 0.64 0.28 0.08 0.05 0.34 0.43 0.11 0.08 0.09 0.62 0.64 0.08

Qinghai 0.99 0.97 0.98 1.00 0.00 0.22 0.85 0.02 0.10 0.35 0.20 0.02 0.27 0.03 0.74 0.67 0.02

Ningxia 0.96 0.99 0.96 0.98 0.77 0.50 0.92 0.02 0.15 0.51 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.04 0.87 0.81 0.23

Xinjiang 0.86 0.72 0.87 0.93 0.34 0.29 0.59 0.10 0.08 0.19 0.59 0.09 0.13 0.14 0.74 0.98 0.10

402
 Table 4. grey mCI ence matnx between tbe mdexes

0.94 0.94 0.99 0.94 0.87 0.89 0.85 0.91 0.87 0.90 0.73 0.80 0.93 0.92 0.90 0.85 0.86

0.99 0.94 0.94 0.92 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.89 0.85 0.89 0.74 0.83 0.92 0.90 0.89 0.85 0.84

0.93 0.92 0.94 0.94 0.87 0.89 0.85 0.91 0.87 0.90 0.73 0.80 0.93 0.92 0.90 0.85 0.86

0.87 0.88 0.87 0.89 0.89 0.91 0.84 0.94 0.90 0.93 0.70 0.79 0.94 0.95 0.93 0.86 0.89

0.89 0.87 0.89 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.83 0.89 0.87 0.93 0.71 0.77 0.88 0.89 0.92 0.87 0.87

0.85 0.87 0.85 0.84 0.83 0.81 0.81 0.93 0.94 0.95 0.69 0.76 0.91 0.93 0.97 0.84 0.93

0.91 0.89 0.91 0.95 0.88 0.93 0.81 0.80 0.77 0.82 0.79 0.79 0.84 0.82 0.81 0.85 0.77

0.87 0.85 0.87 0.90 0.87 0.94 0.77 0.94 0.94 0.93 0.68 0.76 0.94 0.98 0.94 0.84 0.93

0.90 0.89 0.90 0.93 0.93 0.95 0.82 0.93 0.92 0.93 0.66 0.74 0.90 0.93 0.94 0.81 0.99

0.73 0.74 0.73 0.70 0.70 0.69 0.79 0.67 0.65 0.69 0.69 0.77 0.92 0.94 0.98 0.85 0.92

0.80 0.83 0.80 0.79 0.77 0.75 0.79 0.76 0.73 0.77 0.74 0.74 0.71 0.69 0.68 0.71 0.65

0.93 0.92 0.93 0.94 0.87 0.91 0.84 0.94 0.89 0.92 0.71 0.79 0.79 0.77 0.76 0.75 0.73

0.92 0.90 0.92 0.95 0.89 0.93 0.82 0.98 0.93 0.94 0.69 0.77 0.95 0.95 0.92 0.85 0.88

0.90 0.89 0.90 0.93 0.92 0.97 0.81 0.94 0.94 0.98 0.69 0.77 0.92 0.94 0.94 0.85 0.92

0.85 0.86 0.86 0.87 0.87 0.84 0.85 0.84 0.81 0.86 0.72 0.75 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.93

0.86 0.84 0.87 0.90 0.86 0.93 0.77 0.93 0.99 0.92 0.66 0.73 0.89 0.92 0.93 0.80 0.80

Table 6 grey classes for 31 provinces of china

The first grey c1ass(high safety level) The second grey c1ass(general safety level) The third grey c1ass(low safety level)

Shanxi, Zhejiang, Fujian, Tibet, Hainan, Inner Mongolia, Jilin, Anhui, Heilongjiang, Beijing, Tianjin, Hebei, Liaoning,

Guangdong, Sichuan, Guizhou, Yunnan, Jiangxi, Hunan, Guangxi, Chongqing, Shanghai, Jiangsu, Shandong, Henan,

Gansu, Qinghai, Xinjiang Shanxi, Ningxia Hubei

403