Combining driver response with cyclical queue optimisation over selected corridors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Summary A case study located in Auckland, New Zealand, was used to quantify the magnitude of savings that may result if the SCATS adaptive traffic control system contains an explicitly combined queue estimation and offset adjustment on a cycle‐by‐cycle basis. A validated SATURN traffic model was used to evaluate five scenarios that represent the short‐run and long‐run efficiency gains resulting from progressive signal adaption with an objective of queue minimisation on the main corridors. Optimisation was applied both area‐wide, and on selected arterial corridors, using a combined split/offset optimisation routine with responsive driver behaviour to achieve a network‐wide and corridor‐specific efficiency gain. The modelling heuristic evaluates the efficiency of both the Equisat and P0 optimisation policies that would mimic a more progressive adaption of signals under SCATS. Results for the long‐run area‐wide optimisation can produce network‐wide travel‐time savings in the order of 20% and a reduction in transient queues of 28% if only selected corridors are optimised, with a 5% reduction in journey time over an average 8‐min journey. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".