A Cellular Automata Model for Heterogeneous Traffic Flow Incorporating Micro Autonomous Vehicles
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite the fact that significant research efforts have been made to the traffic flow theory of autonomous vehicles and manual vehicles, few existing studies have incorporated different modes of both vehicles in their analysis. In this study, we develop a cellular automata simulation model to investigate the impact of different modes of autonomous vehicles (autonomous car, autonomous bus, and autonomous micro car) and conventional vehicles (manual car, manual bus, and manual micro car) on the characteristics of traffic flow. A new type of autonomous mode, i.e., autonomous micro car, is investigated in the model to study the effects of this vehicle mode on the overall capacity of the network. Furthermore, two types of lane-changing behavior, i.e., aggressive lane changing and polite lane changing, are incorporated into the model. The results reveal that micro cars (manual and autonomous) have the potential to reduce traffic congestions and increase the capacity or flow rate (vehicles/hour) of the road. Where the average vehicle occupancy is less than 2, if autonomous micro cars are deployed alongside autonomous cars, the flow rate (vehicles/hour) can be increased significantly. The results highlight the significance of the autonomous micro cars to traffic flow, passenger occupancy, and road capacity.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.003 | 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".