How Accurate Are AI-Generated Road Risk Scores for City Planning?

Explore how AI-generated road risk scores work, how accurate they really are, and how cities are using them to proactively prevent crashes and save lives.

As cities embrace data-driven approaches to improve road safety, AI-generated road risk scores have emerged as a valuable tool for transportation planners and engineers. These predictive models use machine learning to analyze crash trends, traffic flow, and roadway characteristics to identify potentially hazardous road segments—often before a collision occurs.

The promise of this technology is compelling: instead of relying solely on historical crash data or public complaints, cities can proactively identify and address high-risk areas. But one important question remains: how accurate are these AI-generated road risk scores in practice? And how can they be validated for real-world use?

This article explores how these models work, what influences their accuracy, and how agencies are incorporating them into planning workflows.

What Are AI-Generated Road Risk Scores?

AI-generated road risk scores are a form of predictive analytics designed to estimate the likelihood of future crashes or safety issues on specific road segments. These tools go beyond traditional crash mapping by using machine learning to identify patterns and forecast risk based on a wide range of variables.

Typical outputs may include:

• A numeric risk score (e.g., 0–100)
• Risk tiers (e.g., low, moderate, high)
• Heatmaps highlighting high-risk areas

Common Data Inputs in Risk Modeling:

• Historical crash records: Frequency, severity, time of day, and location
• Traffic volume and speed data: Especially 85th percentile speeds and speeding trends
• Roadway features: Lanes, curves, crosswalks, lighting, sidewalks, and grade
• Environmental context: Land use, pedestrian activity, proximity to schools or transit
• Real-time inputs (for advanced models): Weather, congestion levels, sensor data, and near-miss reports

Machine learning algorithms—such as regression models, decision trees, or neural networks—are trained on this data to generate risk predictions for each road segment.

What Affects the Accuracy of Risk Scores?

The reliability of AI-generated risk scores depends on several key factors:

1. Data Quality and Completeness

High-quality, up-to-date data is essential. Incomplete crash records, outdated traffic counts, or missing roadway attributes can reduce predictive accuracy. The most effective systems integrate real-time feeds like sensor data or crowd-sourced reports to stay current.

2. Model Design and Relevant Features

Accuracy also depends on the algorithm’s design and the diversity of input factors. Advanced models that consider a wide range of spatial, temporal, and contextual variables have shown significantly better results than those based solely on crash history. Some hybrid models have achieved 85–90% accuracy in predicting future collision locations.

3. Ability to Adapt to Change

Urban environments evolve rapidly. New developments, policy shifts (like reduced speed limits), or seasonal changes can impact safety risk. Models that are not regularly updated may become outdated. The most accurate systems are those that adapt dynamically with fresh data.

4. Ongoing Validation and Model Retraining

Validation ensures that predictions align with real-world outcomes. Agencies should monitor whether flagged high-risk areas actually experience crashes—or show improvement after interventions. Regular model retraining is crucial for maintaining performance over time.

Measuring Predictive Accuracy in Practice

Accuracy is typically measured using metrics such as:

• Classification accuracy: Did the model correctly predict high-risk vs. low-risk locations?
• ROC-AUC scores: How well does the model distinguish risk levels?
• Precision and recall: Especially useful in identifying actual hotspots while minimizing false positives.

In controlled studies, some predictive models have achieved ROC-AUC scores above 0.85, with one study reporting up to 97% accuracy under ideal conditions. In practice, models that can reliably predict 70–90% of crash-prone areas are considered highly effective.

Even if not perfect, moderately accurate predictions can still help cities prioritize safety reviews, secure funding, and guide enforcement strategies.

Validating AI Risk Scores with Real-World Data

Validation is essential to ensure risk scores lead to measurable safety outcomes.

Pilot Programs and Phased Rollouts

Agencies often begin with small-scale deployments to compare predicted hotspots with actual crash data, enforcement incidents, or community reports.

Before-and-After Studies

After implementing safety improvements—such as enhanced signage or traffic signal upgrades—planners monitor whether crash rates and violations decrease in those areas.

Crash Dashboards and Continuous Tracking

Many cities use integrated platforms to monitor long-term trends, enabling them to track performance and refine risk models based on real-world results.

A notable example comes from Hawaii’s Department of Transportation, which developed a statewide AI-driven system to forecast crashes. The platform not only identified potential hotspots but also estimated lives that could be saved through proactive interventions—projecting up to seven prevented fatalities over three years.

How Cities Are Using Risk Scores in Practice

Across the U.S., more than 100 cities now integrate AI-generated risk scores into their safety planning processes. These tools are typically delivered through interactive geospatial dashboards, allowing planners to:

• Visualize heatmaps of high-risk segments
• Rank corridors by severity and contributing factors
• Review historical data and predictive insights
• Prioritize and evaluate interventions

This type of visibility enables data-driven decisions and strengthens community support for safety projects. In many cases, cities have also published these dashboards publicly to increase transparency and align residents with planned improvements.

Conclusion: A Data-Informed Path to Safer Streets

AI-generated road risk scores mark a significant evolution in how cities approach traffic safety. While no model guarantees perfect predictions, these tools offer a proactive way to identify risks, prioritize responses, and measure outcomes.

When well-calibrated, these models can achieve high levels of accuracy—often in the 80–90% range—and deliver actionable insights that complement traditional engineering methods. They are especially valuable when combined with field audits, public input, and ongoing data collection.

As connected vehicles, smart sensors, and near-real-time traffic data become more widespread, the precision and impact of AI-powered risk scoring will only increase. Cities that embrace these tools stand to gain both in efficiency and in lives saved.

In this evolving space Urban SDK is helping cities integrate predictive risk models into everyday planning workflows—offering planners the context and visibility needed to make smarter, safer decisions.

AI isn’t a silver bullet, but it’s fast becoming a critical step forward on the journey to safer, more proactive transportation systems.

‍