MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4311268955 · doi:10.1139/cjce-2022-0181

Impacts of cooperative adaptive cruise control and cooperative lane changing on delay and riding comfort in autonomous car–autonomous truck mixed traffic

2022· article· en· W4311268955 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Mohammadsina Semnarshad, Chris Lee, Yong Hoon Kim

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTraffic control and management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCooperative Adaptive Cruise ControlTruckCruise controlAutomotive engineeringAccelerationCruiseComputer scienceSimulationEngineeringControl (management)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study examines the impacts of cooperative adaptive cruise control (CACC) and cooperative lane changing (CLC) on the delay and the riding comfort in autonomous car–autonomous truck (AC–AT) mixed traffic at a freeway merging area. For this task, AC–AT mixed traffic on a 5.25 km section of freeway was analyzed using the Aimsun Next microscopic traffic simulation. The effects of different CACC parameters and CLC on the average speed and acceleration distributions as the measures of delay and riding comfort, respectively, were evaluated. It was found that (1) lower sensitivity to the lead vehicle reduced the merging time, (2) shorter time gaps between autonomous vehicles and between platoons decreased the delay, and (3) longer time gaps reduced the delay at higher percentage of ATs. These results demonstrate that the delay of AC–AT mixed traffic at a freeway merging area can be reduced and riding comfort can be increased by adjusting CACC parameters.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.006
GPT teacher head0.174
Teacher spread0.167 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Civil EngineeringSame topicTraffic control and managementFrench-language works237,207