A Two‐Stage Cooperative Adaptive Cruise Control for Connected Automated Vehicles in Multislope Roads considering Communication Delay and Actuator Delay
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Connected and automated vehicle platoons (CAVPs) are considered an effective way to alleviate traffic congestion, reduce the incidence of traffic accidents, and improve vehicle economy in the intelligent transportation system (ITS). Vehicles in the CAVPs can communicate with each other through V2X technology, which could optimize the economy of the platoon. Cooperative adaptive cruise control (CACC) can make effective use of the characteristics of CAVPs and contribute to resource conservation, ecological driving, and traffic system development. In this paper, a two‐stage CACC method is proposed for CAVPs to reduce fuel consumption in the multislope road section. In the first stage, the optimal velocity profiles for the leader based on dynamic programming (DP) are planned according to the road information and the fuel consumption model. In the second stage, a vehicle longitudinal third‐order differential dynamics model is utilized to build the platoon time‐delay system considering communication delay and actuator delay. A feedback controller is developed for each vehicle considering the internal stability and the string stability of the CAVPs. Results show that the proposed method can save 5.33% of fuel consumption compared to the constant speed cooperative adaptive cruise control (CS‐CACC) method and has a better tracking performance compared to the model predictive control (MPC) method. The CACC method proposed in this paper can provide a theoretical basis and data support for building an ecological CACC strategy for CAVPs.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".