This section describes all the ingredients needed to formulate our problem, including the traffic flow model to describe the behavior of vehicles, the type of network, the vehicle routing assumptions and the traffic signal configuration.
The numerical examples are based on the simplest microscopic network model able to reproduce critical behavior, first described in [
21].
The traffic flow model is the elementary cellular automata (CA) rule 184 [
5], known to be the most efficient computational method to obtain the
exact solution of the kinematic wave model (or LWR model) [
22,
23] with a triangular flow-density fundamental diagram [
24,
25]. Accordingly, here both the free-flow speed and the wave speed are equal to 1, implying that the link saturation flow is 1/2, the link critical density
is also 1/2, and the link jam density is 1, without loss of generality. In a CA model, each lane of the road is divided into small cells
the size of a vehicle jam spacing, where cell
ℓ is the most downstream cell of the lane. The value in each cell can be either “1” if a vehicle is present and “0” otherwise.
The network corresponds to a grid network of bidirectional streets with one lane per direction and with a traffic light on all intersections. To attain spatial homogeneity, the network is defined on a torus where each street can be thought of as a ring road where all intersections have 4 incoming and 4 outgoing approaches; see
Figure 1.
Vehicle routing is assumed to be
fully adaptive to avoid unrealistic bifurcations in the MFD [
26]. Bifurcation takes place when drivers cannot clear the intersection because the downstream link in their route is jammed. If the driver does not adapt and change his/her route, the jam propagates even faster, eventually leading to gridlock, with a portion of the links in the network being jammed, and the rest being empty. As this type of bifurcations are not common in real networks, we employ the full adaptive assumption not only for parsimony but also because it gives a useful benchmark. Future studies could vary the percentage of drivers that are adaptive, as some literature suggests that the benefits of adaptive driver quickly decrease once 50% or more of the drivers behave adaptively [
27]. Here, the full adaptability is implemented using random routing: A driver reaching the stop line, say Mary, will choose to turn with probability
p or keep going straight with probability
. If Mary decides to turn, she will turn left, right or U-turn with equal probability. If two or more vehicles are bound for the same approach during a time step, the tie is broken randomly. If the downstream approach is blocked then Mary will not move during that time step, and will repeat the same selection process during the next time step, discarding any information about prior trials.
Traffic signals operate under the simplest possible setting with only red and green phases (no lost time, red-red, yellow, nor turning phases). All the control policies consider here are
incremental in the sense that decisions are taken every
g time steps, which can be interpreted as a minimum green time: After the completion of each green time of length
g, the controller decides whether to prolong the current phase or to switch light colors. The following signal control policies will be used as baseline in this paper: