MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2171210875 · doi:10.1109/iwcmc.2013.6583651

Adaptive Traffic Light Control using VANET: A case study

2013· article· en· W2171210875 on OpenAlexaffabout
S. Kwatirayo, Jalal Almhana, Zixin Liu

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicVehicular Ad Hoc Networks (VANETs)
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Moncton
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVehicular ad hoc networkComputer scienceIntersection (aeronautics)Traffic flow (computer networking)Floating car dataTraffic optimizationTraffic congestion reconstruction with Kerner's three-phase theoryTraffic congestionTransport engineeringThroughputAdaptive controlComputer networkControl (management)Real-time computingWireless ad hoc networkTelecommunicationsEngineeringArtificial intelligenceWireless

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Rapid urbanization has put increasingly pressure on traffic management in urban areas. Conventional traffic signal with fixed or pre-defined variable cycles setting can slightly alleviate the increasing traffic problem, but cannot deal with continuously growing vehicular traffic in rapidly growing urban areas. VANET technology offers a promising solution for better vehicular traffic management in urban area to reduce traffic jam and improve transportation safety. Adaptive Traffic Light Control (ATLC) using VANET has attracted considerable attention from academic community. Unfortunately, most of these existing works used simulated traffic flow and hypothetical intersection architectures which may not reflect the reality of urban area. In this paper, we present a case study based on a specific intersection in the city of Moncton with real traffic data, and propose a new adaptive traffic light control algorithm. Our results show a substantial improvement of traffic throughput and average waiting time in comparison with fixed optimal cycle's time currently used by the city of Moncton and with existing adaptive solutions.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.820

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.194 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations40
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicVehicular Ad Hoc Networks (VANETs)French-language works237,207