MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386917421 · doi:10.1155/2023/2761858

Modeling the Effect of the Platoon Size of CAVs on Mixed Traffic Flow: A Cellular Automaton Method

2023· article· en· W4386917421 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Yangsheng Jiang, Zhiyuan Yi, Guosheng Xiao, Hongwu Li, Zhihong Yao

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Advanced Transportation · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTraffic control and management
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFundamental Research Funds for the Central UniversitiesEducation Department of Hunan Province
KeywordsPlatoonCellular automatonCooperative Adaptive Cruise ControlTraffic flow (computer networking)Penetration rateCruise controlSimulationComputer scienceControl theory (sociology)EngineeringAlgorithmControl (management)Computer networkArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study proposes a cellular automaton model incorporating the platoon size of connected automated vehicles (CAVs) to examine their impact on mixed traffic flow. First, vehicles are classified into three modes, human-driven vehicles (HDVs), adaptive cruise control (ACC), and cooperative adaptive cruise control (CACC), by considering the characteristics of the car-following behavior. Second, the CACC is further subdivided into interplatoon and intraplatoon car-following modes due to the limitations of the platoon size of CAVs. Then, cellular automaton rules are developed for each of these four modes. Finally, numerical simulation experiments are conducted to analyze the influence of the penetration rate and platoon size of CAVs on mixed traffic flow. The results demonstrate that (1) the simulation results closely align with the theoretically derived outcomes, with an error rate of only 0.46% at a penetration rate of 100%; (2) when the penetration rate of CAVs reaches 100%, increasing the platoon size further enhances the traffic capacity; and (3) the optimal platoon size is determined to be seven CAVs under moderate traffic density.

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 score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.267

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.213 · 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

Citations9
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Advanced TransportationSame topicTraffic control and managementFrench-language works237,207