Coordination of Mixed Platoons and Eco-Driving Strategy for a Signal-Free Intersection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper investigates the collaborative control of vehicular traffic for a signal-free intersection. The traffic under consideration is mixed with connected autonomous vehicles (CAVs) and human-piloted vehicles with advanced driver assistance systems (ADAS). The proposed collaborative control is of two levels. At the upper level, the objective is to minimize total delay via platoon control and dynamic priority control of conflicting movements. We formulate the platoon coordination of mixed traffic as a mixed-integer linear programming problem (MILP). This MILP determines whether adjacent vehicles will form a platoon and prioritize any two conflicting movements subject to lateral safety and rear-end safety constraints. At the lower level, we propose an eco-driving strategy to minimize the energy consumption by optimizing the speed profile of the platoon leading vehicles subject to the dynamic priority control from the upper level, i.e., the entry time to the merging zone. We deduce an analytical solution to the eco-driving problem using optimal control theory. Compared with existing benchmarks, such as the first-come-first-served policy, the proposed method outperforms the state-of-the-art controllers in reducing the total delay. Sensitivity analysis regarding the penetration rate of CAVs shows that substantial improvements can be achieved even at low to medium penetration rates of CAVs.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".