Effects analysis of reward functions on reinforcement learning for traffic signal control
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The increasing traffic demand in urban areas frequently causes traffic congestion, which can be managed only through intelligent traffic signal controls. Although many recent studies have focused on reinforcement learning for traffic signal control (RL-TSC), most have focused on improving performance from an intersection perspective, targeting virtual simulation. The performance indexes from intersection perspectives are averaged by the weighted traffic flow; therefore, if the balance of each movement is not considered, the green time may be overly concentrated on the movements of heavy flow rates. Furthermore, as the ultimate purpose of traffic signal control research is to apply these controls to the real-world intersections, it is necessary to consider the real-world constraints. Hence, this study aims to design RL-TSC considering real-world applicability and confirm the appropriate design of the reward function. The limitations of the detector in the real world and the dual-ring traffic signal system are taken into account in the model design to facilitate real-world application. To design the reward for balancing traffic movements, we define the average delay weighted by traffic volume per lane and entropy of delay in the reward function. Model training is performed at the prototype intersection for ensuring scalability to multiple intersections. The model after prototype pre-training is evaluated by applying it to a network with two intersections without additional training. As a result, the reward function considering the equality of traffic movements shows the best performance. The proposed model reduces the average delay by more than 7.4% and 15.0% compared to the existing real-time adaptive signal control at two intersections, 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 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".