Closed Loop Optimal Adaptive Traffic Signal and Ramp Control: A Case Study on Downtown Toronto
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Traffic congestion can be alleviated by infrastructure expansions, however, improving the existing infrastructure using traffic control is more plausible due to the obvious constraints on financial resources and physical space. Independent applications of Adaptive Traffic Signal Control (ATSC) and Ramp Metering (RM) have shown strong potential to effectively alleviate urban traffic congestion by adjusting the signal timings in real-time in response to traffic fluctuations to achieve desirable objectives (e.g., minimize delay at intersections or minimize travel time along freeways). This paper presents the problem formulation and the framework for addressing traffic control problem using an integrated solution combining ATSC and RM. According to that problem definition, an optimal closed-loop approach for ATSC and RM can be designed using a multi-agent reinforcement learning (MARL) approach. Authors' previous studies of MARL on a large-scale simulated network of 59 intersections in the lower downtown core of the City of Toronto for the morning rush hour have shown unprecedented reduction in the average intersection delay up to 39% at the network level, and travel time savings of up 2to 26% along the busiest routes in downtown Toronto. Additionally, authors' studies of MARL applied to a calibrated microsimulation model of the Gardiner Expressway in Toronto, Canada resulted in 50% reduction in total travel time compared with the base case scenario.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".