## 3 Results
### Acceleration Noise  
In the experiment, the speed of the vehicle was reduced to a certain extent due to the influence of the speed-calming measures as the vehicle undertook the left-turning maneuver. Research has indicated a significant correlation between road traffic accidents and vehicle speed, with higher risk associated with greater changes in vehicle speed [26]. The metric of acceleration noise (AN) utilizes the standard deviation of vehicle acceleration relative to the average acceleration to quantify the extent of variation in speed. This parameter serves as a quantitative evaluation index for assessing driving smoothness and reflecting both the driver's comfort and driving stability [27]. Its calculation is presented in Formula (1). In this study, acceleration noise was employed as a parameter for evaluating the operational stability of simulated vehicles, using the following formula for computation:  
\[AN=\left\{\frac{1}{T}\int_{0}^{T}a(t)^{2}dt-(a_{av})^{2}dt\right\}^{\frac{1}{2}} \tag{1}\]  
The acceleration noise experienced by each participant during the process of installing each processing unit (expressed in m/s\({}^{2}\)) is denoted \(a\)(t), where t represents the time needed to traverse the data analysis area (in seconds). Additionally, \(a\)(t) signifies the acceleration at a specific time point, while \(a_{av}\) refers to the average acceleration observed throughout the whole process (measured in m/s\({}^{2}\)). Table 3 shows the numerical values of acceleration in cases featuring different measures.  
The acceleration interference values were consistently higher when velocity stabilization measures were implemented, suggesting that these measures had a discernible impact on the drivers' adaptability and comfort. Notably, the traffic-channelizing lane markings exhibited the minimum acceleration interference value, indicating this particular measure had the smallest influence on driving adaptability and comfort. Conversely, the combination of anti-collision barrels and traffic-channelizing lane markings resulted in the highest acceleration interference value, highlighting its significant impact on driving adaptability and comfort.  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c} \hline \hline
**Treatment Group** & \(p\)**-Value \({}^{*}\)** \\ \hline
1. No speed-calming measures (baseline) & - \\
2. Anti-collision barrels & 0.021 \\
3. Traffic-channelizing lane markings & 0.018 \\
4. Anti-collision barrels and traffic-channelizing lane markings & 0.048 \\
5. Speed bumps and cross-hatched intersection markings & 0.383 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular} \({}^{*}\)\(p<0.05\).  
\end{table}
Table 2: Significance analysis of mean of longitudinal acceleration.  
Based on a substantial volume of experimental data and case analysis, there is an inverse relationship between traffic safety and acceleration interference [28]. Specifically, the degree of acceleration interference directly impacts driving safety and comfort performance. Lower levels of acceleration interference correspond to better driving safety and comfort, while higher levels result in poorer outcomes. When \(\sigma>\) 1.5 m/s2, driving safety can be significantly compromised, necessitating the implementation of appropriate safety warnings. Conversely, when \(\sigma<\) 0.7 m/s2, both driving safety and comfort can be deemed satisfactory. When values fall within the range 0.7 m/s2 \(<\sigma<\)1.5 m/s2, vehicles can be considered to be in satisfactory running condition.