MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Jointly Learning V2X Communication and Platoon Control with Deep Reinforcement Learning

2023· article· en· W4388079005 on OpenAlexaff
Tong Liu, Lei Lei, Zhiming Liu, Kan Zheng

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTraffic control and management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersFundamental Research Funds for the Central UniversitiesChina Mobile Research InstituteNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsPlatoonReinforcement learningComputer scienceCooperative Adaptive Cruise ControlOverhead (engineering)String (physics)Cruise controlControl (management)Artificial neural networkAccelerationDeep learningArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In autonomous vehicle platooning, Vehicle-to-Everything (V2X) communications are leveraged in cooperative adaptive cruise control (CACC) to improve control performance. Since exchanging information at all times incurs significant communication overhead in vehicular networks, it is important to determine when V2X communication is necessary. To solve this problem, we propose a Deep Reinforcement Learning (DRL)-based algorithm named Attention-DDPG, which learns platoon control with Deep Deterministic Policy Gradient (DDPG), and learns when to communicate with an attention network. Specifically, each preceding vehicle is equipped with a deep neural network (DNN), which takes as input its local state and platoon control action and determines whether to transmit its acceleration or not to the following vehicle at each time step. The attention network of a preceding vehicle is trained using the feedback from the following vehicle on the value of V2X information in the form of an advantage function. In order to evaluate Attention-DDPG, simulations are performed using real driving data, and performance is compared with those of two baselines that communicate and do not communicate at all times, respectively. The results demonstrate that Attention-DDPG strikes a competitive tradeoff between control performance and communication overhead while ensuring platoon string stability.

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)0.001
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.176
Teacher spread0.171 · 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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicTraffic control and managementFrench-language works237,207