deletions | additions       diff --git a/Results Motion Prediction.tex b/Results Motion Prediction.tex  index 52cd5fd..220f599 100644  --- a/Results Motion Prediction.tex  +++ b/Results Motion Prediction.tex 
...
\subsection{Sample Surrogate Safety Analysis}  A sample surrogate safety analysis of three of the sites is demonstrated in Figure~\ref{fig:selected-site}. This shows trajectory tracks projected in and with respect to the scene, mean velocity vectors along trajectory tracks tracks,  as well as mean speed at that coordinate, and spatial distribution of motion-pattern-predicted collision points with instantaneous $probability > 1e5$ and $TTC < 1.5 seconds$. Problematic weaving conflicts are highlighted in the first and third example, examples,  particularly for multi-lane roundabouts. The second example instead example, on the other hand,  demonstrates car-following conflicts, particularly at the approach (not surprising considering surprising, given that  this single lane approach frequently experiences queuing as drivers yield to the high conflicting flow) and exit (more surprising). % paul: the merging zone as a unit of analysis is not well defined. Add a figure if we have enough space  % paul->Nicolas: added a definition at the beginning of the section.  %Figure~\ref{fig:ttc_distro_sample} demonstrates a cross-sectional comparison of TTC distributions based on motion prediction at constant velocity for 20 merging zones for two contributing factors, each using all interaction instants. Kolmogorov-Smirnov tests are performed between the distributions to quantify non-parametric dissimilitude. In the first diagram, a cross-sectional comparison is made for merging zones situated nearer more  or further less  than 300 metres upstream from another intersection. When this distance exceeds 300 metres, the distribution mass appears to shift left except for a sharp increase in small TTC below 0.5 seconds. It is so far unknown whether this small concentration of low-TTC conflicts offsets all other increases in TTC. This TTC, therefore this  comparison remainstherefore  inconclusive. In the second diagram, a cross-sectional comparison is made between merging zones with high approach traffic volume ratios and low approach traffic volume ratios, where $R$ is the flow ratio between approach volumes and total volumes at the merging zone. In this comparison, a clear and consistent mass shift is observed, suggesting that high approach traffic volume ratios contribute to safer merging behaviour in a roundabout. % paul: When this distance exceeds 300 metres, the distribution mass appears to shift left -> right ?  % paul->Nicolas: Not entirely. There is a sharp increase in the 0-0.5 range, small number of possibly "severe" conflicts. Conclusion is therefor therefore  inconclusive.