Evaluating the Performance of Connected and Automated Vehicles in Fixed Signal-Controlled Conventional Intersections and Superstreets with Platooning-Based Trajectory Planning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Connected and autonomous vehicles (CAVs) are emerging technology that attracts the interests of many transportation professionals and computational scientists. Several recent studies have investigated different model frameworks of CAVs in different transportation environments, such as on freeways and at conventional intersections. Nevertheless, few efforts have been made to investigate the performances of CAVs at innovative intersections, and the lack of knowledge can result in an inaccurate prediction of CAVs performances in the existing transportation network. This research intends to mitigate this research gap by studying the traffic delay and fuel consumption of CAVs in the environment of the superstreet and its equivalent conventional intersection through simulation-based experiments. A real-world superstreet in Leeland, NC, is selected and used. A conventional intersection with equivalent road designs is established in the simulation platform to make a comparison with the selected superstreet. This research develops both platooning and trajectory planning modeling frameworks to examine the implications of CAVs with different capabilities. The Intelligent Driver Model (IDM) is selected and applied to model the CAV behaviors, while Wiedemann 99 (W99) is used to model Human-Driven Vehicles (HDVs). The simulation results demonstrate the efficiency of both platooning and trajectory planning, respectively. Different effects of CAVs in the superstreet and its equivalent conventional intersection are observed. The findings from this research can provide an important reference for transportation planners and policymakers in predicting the influence of CAVs on the existing transportation infrastructure.
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".