Reinforcement learning‐based approach for urban road project scheduling considering alternative closure types
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Growth in urban population, travel, and motorization continue to cause an increased need for urban projects to expand road capacity. Unfortunately, these projects also cause travel delays, emissions, driver frustration, and other road user adversities. To alleviate these ills, road agencies often face two work zone design choices: close the road fully and re-reroute traffic or implement partial closure. Both options have significant implications for peri-construction road capacity, traveler costs, and the project duration and cost. This study presents a decision-making methodology to facilitate the choice between full road closure and partial closure. The presented decision-making methodology is a bi-level optimization problem: at the upper level, the road agency seeks to optimally schedule road construction work to minimize net vehicle emissions and road construction costs. The lower-level of the problem captures two types of travelers’ route choice behaviors: rational travelers who minimize their travel time and path-loyal travelers who do not change their routes from their pre-construction routes. The bi-level mixed integer nonlinear model is solved using a reinforcement learning-based algorithm (the multi-armed bandit-guided particle swarm optimization [PSO] technique). The computational experiments suggest the superiority of the proposed algorithm, compared to the classic PSO algorithm in terms of solution quality. The numerical results suggest that if the percentage of path-loyal travelers increases, the agency needs to invest more in road project construction to implement under partial closure to avoid a significant increase in vehicle emissions.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".