A Deep Reinforcement Learning Approach for Fair Traffic Signal Control
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Traffic signal control is one of the most effective methods of traffic management in urban areas. In recent years, traffic control methods based on deep reinforcement learning (DRL) have gained attention due to their ability to exploit realtime traffic data, which is often poorly used by the traditional hand-crafted methods. While most recent DRL-based methods have focused on maximizing the throughput or minimizing the average travel time of the vehicles, the fairness of the traffic signal controllers has often been neglected. This is particularly important as neglecting fairness can lead to situations where some vehicles experience extreme waiting times, or where the throughput of a particular traffic flow is highly impacted by the fluctuations of another conflicting flow at the intersection. In order to address these issues, we introduce two notions of fairness: delay-based and throughput-based fairness, which correspond to the two issues mentioned above. Furthermore, we propose two DRL-based traffic signal control methods for implementing these fairness notions, that can achieve a high throughput as well. We evaluate the performance of our proposed methods using three traffic arrival distributions, and find that our methods outperform the baselines in the tested scenarios.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".