Reinforcement Learning for Platooning Control in Vehicular Networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Truck platooning is a promising technology that can reduce costs (fuel consumption) and enhance the overall transportation productivity. While recent research has focused on platoons' network and stability, few studies have tackled platooning formation and control. This paper uses Reinforcement Learning (RL) to study the dispatching control of trucks with arriving platoons, a problem first proposed in [1]. This work builds on [1] by considering the lack of the cost function and statistical knowledge. In particular, we employ Q-learning to compute the optimal dispatch control policy at a highway hub. Given the unbounded state space of the model, traditional Q-learning may converge slowly or even get stuck in sub-optimal policies. We improve Q-learning by confining the agent to transition in a finite subset of the state space. For this purpose, we use the switching condition property of the optimal policy (derived in [1]), the underlying random walk model, and a sensitivity analysis of the cost function. Our numerical results demonstrate that our Enhanced Q-learning converges significantly faster (up to 97%) in terms of CPU time and number of interactions.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".