An Asymmetric-Anticipation Car-following Model in the Era of Autonomous-Connected and Human-Driving Vehicles
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Herein, we explored the impact of anticipation and asymmetric driving behavior on vehicle’s position, velocity, acceleration, energy consumption, and exhaust emissions of CO, HC, and NOx in mixed traffic flow. We present an asymmetric-anticipation car-following model (AAFVD) considering the motion information from two direct preceding vehicles (i.e., human-driving (HD) and autonomous and connected (AC) vehicles platoon) via wireless data transmission. The linear stability approach was used to evaluate the properties of the AAFVD model. Our simulations revealed that the drivers’ anticipation factor using the motion information from two direct preceding vehicles in connected vehicles environment can effectively improve traffic flow stability. The vehicle’s departure and arrival process while passing through a signal lane with a traffic light considering the anticipation and asymmetric driving behavior, and the motion information from two direct preceding vehicles was explored. Our numerical results demonstrated that the AAFVD model can decrease the velocity fluctuations, energy consumption, and exhaust emissions of vehicles in mixed traffic flow 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".