Signal Timing Optimization for Corridors with Multiple Highway-Rail Grade Crossings Using Genetic Algorithm
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Safety and efficiency are two critical issues at highway-rail grade crossings (HRGCs) and their nearby intersections. Standard traffic signal optimization programs are not designed to work on roadway networks that contain multiple HRGCs, because their underlying assumption is that the roadway traffic is in a steady-state. During a train event, steady-state conditions do not occur. This is particularly true for corridors that experience high train traffic (e.g., over 2 trains per hour). In this situation, the non-steady-state conditions predominate. This paper develops a simulation-based methodology for optimizing traffic signal timing plan on corridors of this kind. The primary goal is to maximize safety, and the secondary goal is to minimize delay. A Genetic Algorithm (GA) was used as the optimization approach in the proposed methodology. A new transition preemption strategy for dual tracks (TPS_DT) and a train arrival prediction model were integrated in the proposed methodology. An urban road network with multiple HRGCs in Lincoln, NE, was used as the study network. The microsimulation model VISSIM was used for evaluation purposes and was calibrated to local traffic conditions. A sensitivity analysis with different train traffic scenarios was conducted. It was concluded that the methodology can significantly improve both the safety and efficiency of traffic corridors with HRGCs.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".