MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406982901 · doi:10.1109/mcs.2024.3498552

Traffic Control via Connected and Automated Vehicles (CAVs): An Open-Road Field Experiment with 100 CAVs

2025· article· en· W4406982901 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Control Systems · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTraffic control and management
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersOffice of Energy EfficiencyKing Abdulaziz City for Science and TechnologyCentre National de la Recherche ScientifiqueNational Science FoundationU.S. Department of TransportationTennessee Department of TransportationCalifornia Department of TransportationOffice of Energy Efficiency and Renewable EnergyU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsField (mathematics)Control (management)Automotive engineeringComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceEngineeringMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The CIRCLES project aims to reduce instabilities in traffic flow, which are naturally occurring phenomena due to human driving behavior. Also called “phantom jams” or “stop-and-go waves,” these instabilities are a significant source of wasted energy. Toward this goal, the CIRCLES project designed a control system, referred to as the MegaController by the CIRCLES team, that could be deployed in real traffic. Our field experiment, the MegaVanderTest (MVT), leveraged a heterogeneous fleet of 100 longitudinally controlled vehicles as Lagrangian traffic actuators, each of which ran a controller with the architecture described in this article. The MegaController is a hierarchical control architecture that consists of two main layers. The upper layer is called the <italic xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">Speed Planner</i> and is a centralized optimal control algorithm. It assigns speed targets to the vehicles, conveyed through the LTE cellular network. The lower layer is a control layer, running on each vehicle. It performs local actuation by overriding the stock adaptive cruise controller, using the stock onboard sensors. The Speed Planner ingests live data feeds provided by third parties as well as data from our own control vehicles and uses both to perform the speed assignment. The architecture of the Speed Planner allows for the modular use of standard control techniques, such as optimal control, model predictive control (MPC), kernel methods, and others. The architecture of the local controller allows for the flexible implementation of local controllers. Corresponding techniques include deep reinforcement learning (RL), MPC, and explicit controllers. Depending on the vehicle architecture, all onboard sensing data can be accessed by the local controllers or only some. Likewise, control inputs vary across different automakers, with inputs ranging from torque or acceleration requests for some cars to electronic selection of adaptive cruise control (ACC) setpoints in others. The proposed architecture technically allows for the combination of all possible settings proposed previously, that is {Speed Planner algorithms} × {local Vehicle Controller algorithms} × {full or partial sensing} × {torque or speed control}. Most configurations were tested throughout the ramp up to the MegaVandertest (MVT).

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.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.169
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.218 · 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