Performance Analysis of Decentralized VS Centralized Control for the Traffic Signal Synchronization Problem
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper suggests the adoption of a spatial decomposition method to solve the signal synchronization problem. A good signal setting maximizes the number of vehicles passing through intersections, while minimizing gas emissions and possible delays experienced by drivers. The signals synchronization issue can be defined as the problem of finding the offsets, the green timings, and the cycle length for a series of controlled intersections, minimizing the total delay of the network subject to admissibility constraints. In this paper, the authors optimized the signal setting through a new Surrogate Method calculating the objective function via the <a:math xmlns:a="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="M1"> <a:msub> <a:mrow> <a:mtext>CTM</a:mtext> </a:mrow> <a:mrow> <a:mtext>UT</a:mtext> </a:mrow> </a:msub> </a:math> model while performing a simulation. A spatial decomposition approach is here suggested with a simultaneous analysis of different levels of cooperation among subnetworks. This study tries to identify a subnetwork that might be representative of the entire network while taking into consideration two factors: efficiency and efficacy. A comparison between centralized and decentralized control is performed.
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".