The development of taiwan arterial traffic‐adaptive signal control system and its field test: A taiwan experience
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This Taiwan traffic‐adaptive arterial signal control model borrowed its traffic flow framework mainly from a British traffic‐adaptive control model with a cyclic traffic progression function, i.e. SCOOT (Split Cycle Office Optimisation Technique). The new arterial control model can take into account delays of both major and minor streets and make real‐time signal timing decisions with optimal two‐way signal offsets, so as to create the best arterial signal operation performance. It has been developed to be an online real‐time software for both simulation testing and field validation. Through simulation, it was found that the performance when operating this newly developed real‐time arterial traffic‐adaptive model was significantly better than when using the optimal fixed‐time arterial timing plan. On the aspect of field testing, three signalized intersections located in East District, Tainan City, Taiwan were selected to be the test sites. Fairly good traffic control performance has been demonstrated in that it can effectively reduce travel delays of the control arterial as a whole. Additional discussions about how to combine travel delay and the total number of vehicle stops into a new control performance index have also been included to make the new traffic‐adaptive model more flexible and reasonable to meet the expectations of different driver groups in the arterial system.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".