Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
144 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
7 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
45 tokens/sec
o3 Pro
4 tokens/sec
GPT-4.1 Pro
38 tokens/sec
DeepSeek R1 via Azure Pro
28 tokens/sec
2000 character limit reached

An anisotropic traffic flow model with look-ahead effect for mixed autonomy traffic (2407.20554v2)

Published 30 Jul 2024 in math.AP, cs.SY, and eess.SY

Abstract: In this paper we extend the Aw-Rascle-Zhang (ARZ) non-equilibrium traffic flow model to take into account the look-ahead capability of connected and autonomous vehicles (CAVs), and the mixed flow dynamics of human driven and autonomous vehicles. The look-ahead effect of CAVs is captured by a non-local averaged density within a certain distance (the look-ahead distance). We show, using wave perturbation analysis, that increased look-ahead distance loosens the stability criteria. Our numerical experiments, however, showed that a longer look-ahead distance does not necessarily lead to faster convergence to equilibrium states. We also examined the impact of spatial distributions and market penetrations of CAVs and showed that increased market penetration helps stabilizing mixed traffic while the spatial distribution of CAVs have less effect on stability. The results revealed the potential of using CAVs to stabilize traffic, and may provide qualitative insights on speed control in the mixed autonomy environment.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (39)
  1. On kinematic waves ii. a theory of traffic flow on long crowded roads. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series A. Mathematical and Physical Sciences, 229(1178):317–345, 1955.
  2. Paul I Richards. Shock waves on the highway. Operations research, 4(1):42–51, 1956.
  3. Harold J Payne. Model of freeway traffic and control. Mathematical Model of Public System, pages 51–61, 1971.
  4. Gerald Beresford Whitham. Linear and nonlinear waves, volume 42. John Wiley & Sons, 2011.
  5. Resurrection of” second order” models of traffic flow. SIAM journal on applied mathematics, 60(3):916–938, 2000.
  6. H Michael Zhang. A non-equilibrium traffic model devoid of gas-like behavior. Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, 36(3):275–290, 2002.
  7. The aw–rascle and zhang’s model: Vacuum problems, existence and regularity of the solutions of the riemann problem. Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, 41(7):710–721, 2007.
  8. Riemann problem resolution and godunov scheme for the aw-rascle-zhang model. Transportation science, 43(4):531–545, 2009.
  9. Saeed Mohammadian and Femke van Wageningen-Kessels. Improved numerical method for aw-rascle type continuum traffic flow models. Transportation Research Record, 2672(20):262–276, 2018.
  10. Generic second order traffic flow modelling. Transportation and traffic theory, 2007:755–776, 2007.
  11. Comparative model accuracy of a data-fitted generalized aw-rascle-zhang model. arXiv preprint arXiv:1310.8219, 2013.
  12. Micro-macro limit of a nonlocal generalized aw-rascle type model. SIAM Journal on Applied Mathematics, 80(4):1841–1861, 2020.
  13. On the aw-rascle-zhang traffic models with nonlocal look-ahead interactions. arXiv preprint arXiv:2403.08643, 2024.
  14. GCK Wong and SC Wong. A multi-class traffic flow model–an extension of lwr model with heterogeneous drivers. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 36(9):827–841, 2002.
  15. HM Zhang and WL Jin. Kinematic wave traffic flow model for mixed traffic. Transportation Research Record, 1802(1):197–204, 2002.
  16. Multiclass first-order simulation model to explain non-linear traffic phenomena. Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, 385(2):667–682, 2007.
  17. S Logghe. Multi-class kinematic wave theory of traffic flow. Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, 42(6):523–541, 2008.
  18. Gordon Frank Newell. A moving bottleneck. Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, 32(8):531–537, 1998.
  19. Modeling heterogeneous traffic flow: A pragmatic approach. Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, 99:183–204, 2017.
  20. Continuum modeling of cooperative traffic flow dynamics. Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, 388(13):2705–2716, 2009.
  21. Dong Ngoduy. Analytical studies on the instabilities of heterogeneous intelligent traffic flow. Communications in Nonlinear Science and Numerical Simulation, 18(10):2699–2706, 2013.
  22. Dong Ngoduy. Instability of cooperative adaptive cruise control traffic flow: A macroscopic approach. Communications in Nonlinear Science and Numerical Simulation, 18(10):2838–2851, 2013.
  23. Heterogeneous traffic flow modelling using second-order macroscopic continuum model. Physics Letters A, 381(3):115–123, 2017.
  24. Scalable traffic stability analysis in mixed-autonomy using continuum models. Transportation research part C: emerging technologies, 111:616–630, 2020.
  25. Traffic jams without bottlenecks—experimental evidence for the physical mechanism of the formation of a jam. New journal of physics, 10(3):033001, 2008.
  26. Dissipation of stop-and-go waves via control of autonomous vehicles: Field experiments. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, 89:205–221, 2018.
  27. Traffic control via connected and automated vehicles: An open-road field experiment with 100 cavs. arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.17043, 2024.
  28. Stabilizing traffic flow via a single autonomous vehicle: Possibilities and limitations. In 2017 IEEE Intelligent Vehicles Symposium (IV), pages 1336–1341. IEEE, 2017.
  29. Leading cruise control in mixed traffic flow: System modeling, controllability, and string stability. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems, 23(8):12861–12876, 2021.
  30. Safety-critical traffic control by connected automated vehicles. Transportation research part C: emerging technologies, 154:104230, 2023.
  31. Multi-anticipative car-following model. The European Physical Journal B-Condensed Matter and Complex Systems, 7:331–335, 1999.
  32. Cluster effect in initially homogeneous traffic flow. Physical review E, 48(4):R2335, 1993.
  33. Self-sustained nonlinear waves in traffic flow. Physical Review E—Statistical, Nonlinear, and Soft Matter Physics, 79(5):056113, 2009.
  34. Structural properties of the stability of jamitons. In Mathematical descriptions of traffic flow: Micro, macro and kinetic models, pages 35–62. Springer, 2021.
  35. Ami Harten. High resolution schemes for hyperbolic conservation laws. Journal of computational physics, 135(2):260–278, 1997.
  36. A study of traffic capacity. In Highway research board proceedings, volume 14, pages 448–477. Washington, DC, 1935.
  37. An analytical approximation for the macroscopic fundamental diagram of urban traffic. Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, 42(9):771–781, 2008.
  38. Distributed model predictive control approach for cooperative car-following with guaranteed local and string stability. Transportation research part B: methodological, 128:69–86, 2019.
  39. Dynamical analysis of an optimal velocity model with time-delayed feedback control. Communications in Nonlinear Science and Numerical Simulation, 90:105333, 2020.
Citations (1)
View on Semantic Scholar

Summary

We haven't generated a summary for this paper yet.

Ai Sparkles Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com Summarize Now