MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4315750744 · doi:10.1139/cjce-2022-0273

Adaptive traffic signal control using deep Q-learning: case study on optimal implementations

2023· article· en· W4315750744 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Guangyuan Pan, Matthew Muresan, Liping Fu

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTraffic control and management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImplementationComputer scienceReinforcement learningStability (learning theory)Field (mathematics)Intersection (aeronautics)Machine learningArtificial intelligenceControl (management)Key (lock)Representation (politics)Software engineeringEngineeringTransport engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Deep reinforcement learning has found great successes in addressing many challenging control problems; however, real-world implementations are still scarce if not non-existent. This is primarily due to three main challenges pertaining to the implementation, the stability, the optimal settings, and a lack of knowledge on methods that can be applied to field settings. This research attempts to address these issues with an adaptive simulation-based control framework proposed specifically for the training and evaluation. The control framework has implemented simulation models to conduct an extensive sensitivity analysis on the effects of key design variables, including rewarding schemes, state spaces, and model training parameters. The feasibility of transfer learning as a training strategy is also studied on scenarios with different layouts and different driver behavior models. Complex scenarios are also evaluated and used as test cases, including multiphase ring-and-barrier control and multi-intersection control. The research has contributed a significant amount of evidence on several critical design and implementation-related questions such as input representation, data (technology) requirements, training methods, and model transferability.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.051
Threshold uncertainty score0.975

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.206 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations5
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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