Modeling Microscopic Car-Following Strategy of Mixed Traffic to Identify Optimal Platoon Configurations for Multiobjective Decision-Making
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Microscopic detail of complex vehicle interactions in mixed traffic, involving manual driving system (MDS) and automated driving system (ADS), is imperative in determining the extent of response by ADS vehicles in the connected automated vehicle (CAV) environment. In this context, this paper proposes a naïve microscopic car-following strategy for a mixed traffic stream in CAV settings and specified shifts in traffic mobility, safety, and environmental features. Additionally, this study explores the influences of platoon properties (i.e., intra-platoon headway, inter-platoon headway, and maximum platoon length) on traffic stream characteristics. Different combinations of MDS and ADS vehicles are simulated in order to understand the variations of improvements induced by ADS vehicles in a traffic stream. Simulation results reveal that grouping ADS vehicles at the front of traffic stream to apply Cooperative Adaptive Cruise Control (CACC) based car-following model will generate maximum mobility benefits for upstream vehicles. Both mobility and environmental improvements can be realized by forming long, closely spaced ADS vehicles at the cost of reduced safety. To achieve balanced mobility, safety, and environmental advantages from mixed traffic environment, dynamically optimized platoon configurations should be determined at varying traffic conditions and ADS market penetrations.
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".