Automated Adaptive Traffic Corridor Control Using Reinforcement Learning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Advancements in intelligent transportation systems and communication technology could considerably reduce delay and congestion through an array of networkwide traffic control and management strategies. The two most promising control tools for freeway corridors are traffic-responsive ramp metering and dynamic traffic diversion using variable message signs (VMSs). The use of these control methods independently could limit their usefulness. Therefore, integrated corridor control by using ramp metering and VMS diversion simultaneously could be beneficial. Administration of freeways and adjacent arterials often falls under different jurisdictional authorities. Lack of coordination among those authorities caused by lack of means for information exchange or “institutional gridlock” could hinder the full potential of technically possible integrated control. Fully automating corridor control could alleviate this problem. Research was conducted to develop a self-learning adaptive integrated freeway–arterial corridor control for both recurring and nonrecurring congestion. Reinforcement learning, an artificial intelligence method for machine learning, is used to provide a single, multiple, or integrated optimal control agent for a freeway or freeway–arterial corridor for both recurrent and nonrecurrent congestion. The microsimulation tool Paramics, which has been used to train and evaluate the agent in an offline mode within a simulated environment, is described. Results from various simulation case studies in the Toronto, Canada, area are encouraging and have demonstrated the effectiveness and superiority of the technique.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".