MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409543526 · doi:10.1155/atr/3890878

Multi‐Intersection Signal Control Based on Asynchronous Reinforcement Learning

2025· article· en· W4409543526 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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Advanced Transportation · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElevator Systems and Control
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Key Research and Development Program of China
KeywordsReinforcement learningIntersection (aeronautics)Asynchronous communicationComputer scienceSIGNAL (programming language)ReinforcementControl (management)Traffic signalArtificial intelligenceTransport engineeringEngineeringReal-time computingTelecommunicationsStructural engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

State‐of‐the‐art theoretical models and new traffic signal control technologies are key guarantees for improving the management and safety performance of transportation systems, and multiagent reinforcement learning (MARL) methods have been widely applied in the field of signal control. Researchers in the transportation domain have effectively addressed the issues of poor convergence and suboptimal optimization encountered in RL for multi‐intersection signal control scenarios by adopting the centralized training with decentralized execution (CTDE) approach. However, due to the heterogeneity among intersections, simply decomposing the global reward into a sum of intersection‐level rewards is unreasonable, posing a challenge in balancing the interests of individual intersections and the entire road network. Additionally, the assumption that all intersections within the system make decisions synchronously is rather strong. Therefore, this paper proposes a distributed traffic model tailored for synchronous decision‐making and, based on that, introduces an asynchronous decision‐making traffic model according to decoupled intersection control. Simulation experiments show that the asynchronous decision‐making method proposed in this paper not only improves the model convergence speed by at least 19% compared to the multiagent deep RL (MADRL) algorithm used for synchronous decision‐making, but also improves the model by at least 10.5% in vehicle driving speed, maximum queue length, and average queue length within the decodable range (the traffic density is between 100 vehicles/km and 400 vehicles/km). In the same traffic scenario, the MADRL algorithm used for asynchronous decision‐making has improved the average vehicle delay and average queue length by at least 55% compared to traditional arterial green wave control methods and adaptive control methods, and by at least 5% compared to SAC and A2C methods.

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 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 score0.827
Threshold uncertainty score0.397

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.204 · 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