Impact of Electric Vehicles on Traffic Assignment and Carbon Emission for Road Network: Modeling and Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper develops a method for estimating carbon‐emission specific road networks, considering the presence of electric vehicles (EVs). A mixed equilibrium traffic assignment model is set up to obtain the traffic volume for each link in the network, where oil‐fueled vehicles (OFVs) prioritizing travel time minimization, while EVs also consider charging station locations and battery charge state in route selection. A carbon‐emission estimation method is then developed, which is calculated by three parameters of traffic volume, average speed, and the road category. A case study is carried out using two networks. It is found that the travel time of the road network has increased by 27%, because EVs tend to choose paths containing charging stations. The route selection of EVs is affected by perceived risk, safe electric quantity, and expected charging electricity. EVs can reduce carbon dioxide emissions but not energy consumption for road network. In addition, it was found that the location of charging stations has a significant impact on traffic flow. After optimizing the location of charging stations, the total travel time, total carbon emissions, and balance of charging station utilization indicators in the transportation network have all relatively decreased. Among them, the total travel time has decreased by 0.2%, the total carbon emissions have decreased by 1.85%, and the balance of charging station utilization has decreased by 0.95%. The research is helpful for determining the locations of charging piles and designing road networks, and it is also helpful for estimating the traffic flow and carbon 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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".