MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3123474717 · doi:10.1155/2021/8838922

Queue Intensity Adaptive Signal Control for Isolated Intersection Based on Vehicle Trajectory Data

2021· article· en· W3123474717 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Juyuan Yin, Peng Chen, Keshuang Tang, Jian Sun

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Advanced Transportation · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTraffic control and management
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Key Research and Development Program of China Stem Cell and Translational ResearchNational Key Research and Development Program of ChinaShanghai Municipal Education CommissionNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsQueueIntersection (aeronautics)SynchroControl theory (sociology)Real-time computingComputer scienceTrajectoryQueueing theorySimulationEngineeringComputer networkPhysicsControl (management)Artificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With recent development of mobile Internet technology and connected vehicle technology, vehicle trajectory data are readily available and exhibit great potential to be used as an alternative data source for urban traffic signal control. In this study, a Queue Intensity Adaptive (QIA) algorithm is proposed, using vehicle trajectory data as the only input to perform adaptive signal control. First, a Kalman filter-based method is employed to estimate real-time queue state with vehicle trajectories. Then, based on queue intensity that quantifies queuing pressure, five control situations are defined, and different min-max optimization models are designed correspondingly. Last, a situation-aware signal control optimization procedure is developed to adapt intersection’s queue intensity. QIA algorithm optimizes phase sequence and green time simultaneously. One case study was conducted at a field intersection in Shenzhen, China. The results show that provided with 7.4% penetrated vehicle trajectories, QIA algorithm effectively prevented queue spillback by constraining temporal percentage of queue spillback under 2.4%. The performance of QIA was also compared with the algorithm in Synchro and Max Pressure (MP) method. It was found that compared with Synchro, the extreme queue intensity, temporal percentage of queue spillback, delay, and stops were decreased by 54.7%, 97%, 22.3%, and 45.1%, respectively, and compared with MP the above four indices were decreased by 16%, 61.5%, −1.8%, and 49.4%, respectively.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.206 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations13
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Advanced TransportationSame topicTraffic control and managementFrench-language works237,207