What has actually been measured.
Numbers produced by running the event layer end to end on real driving data. Not projections, and not a benchmark we selected after the fact.
Sample
| Source | comma1M |
| Segments | 60 |
| Frames | 72,001 |
| Distance | 53.4 km |
| Sample rate | 20 Hz |
| Mean speed | 53 km/h |
Event rates at 3.0 m/s² (0.31 g)
| Event | Count | Per 100 km |
|---|---|---|
| Harsh braking | 13 | 24.4 |
| Harsh acceleration | 18 | 33.7 |
| Hard cornering | 21 | 39.3 |
29 of 60 segments contained at least one event. Median event peak 3.61 m/s², median duration 1.42 s.
Rates move 6.7× across thresholds every programme would defend.
| Threshold | g | Braking / 100 km | Acceleration / 100 km | Cornering / 100 km |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2.0 m/s² | 0.20 | 74.9 | 80.6 | 86.2 |
| 2.5 m/s² | 0.25 | 39.3 | 52.5 | 61.8 |
| 3.0 m/s² | 0.31 | 24.4 | 33.7 | 39.3 |
| 3.5 m/s² | 0.36 | 20.6 | 16.9 | 24.4 |
| 4.0 m/s² | 0.41 | 13.1 | 16.9 | 11.2 |
| 4.5 m/s² | 0.46 | 11.2 | 11.2 | 5.6 |
| 5.0 m/s² | 0.51 | 11.2 | 9.4 | 1.9 |
Where the acceleration mass actually sits on this sample: |a_long| has a 50th percentile of 0.27 and a 99th of 3.49 m/s²; |a_lat| has a 50th of 0.08 and a 99th of 3.03. The common 3.0 m/s² default therefore lands almost exactly on the 99th percentile of both — the steepest part of the distribution, where the count changes fastest.
Two vendors observing identical driving can legitimately report rates differing by most of an order of magnitude. This is why we publish thresholds beside every number, and why we do not publish a risk score.
The check that catches a backwards signal.
Curvature is derived from fused ego-pose, where a sign or axis error produces confident, plausible, wrong numbers. It is verified against curvature computed independently from the position track.
| Trajectory vs yaw-rate correlation, this sample | −0.927 |
| Same measure, independent 551-segment run | −0.917 |
| Curvature unit plausibility | pass |
Two independent samples agreeing to 0.01 is what gives confidence the derivation is not mirrored. The correlation is negative by construction — trajectory curvature is positive counter-clockwise while yaw rate is positive clockwise.
What this sample does not show
- 53.4 km is a correctness demonstration, not a population. It shows the pipeline computes what it claims to compute.
- comma1M is consumer-device footage at a 53 km/h mean — mixed city and motorway, averaging 0.89 km per segment.
- Nothing here supports a claim about how often drivers in general brake hard, and nothing here has been correlated with collisions.