Based on the two-lane, symmetric traffic model (STCA), a modified traffic model, including Vehicle-to-Infrastructure (V2I) communication (STCA V2I model, for short), is presented. The combined full-autonomous and semi-autonomous vehicles are able to exchange information as well as the intentions of the driver with the surrounding vehicles through V2I communication. In the analyzed case, the communication between vehicles includes the sending of information to vehicles to the rear about the traffic situation ahead. Numerical simulations present a greater dispersion of vehicles with the same traffic density and fewer lane changes, while maintaining the same average vehicle speed as in the STCA model. Spatial–temporal profiles of traffic flow indicate that vehicles moving in accordance with the STCA V2I model are not subject to unnecessary concentration. Numerical studies have shown the positive and negative effects of transmitting traffic congestion messages.
WangNWangXPalacharlaP, et al. Cooperative autonomous driving for traffic congestion avoidance through vehicle-to-vehicle communications. In: IEEE Vehicular Networking Conference, VNC. IEEE, pp.327–330.
2.
UrmsonCAnhaltJBagnellD, et al. Autonomous driving in urban environments: Boss and the Urban Challenge. J F Robot2008; 25: 425–466.
3.
van den BergVACVerhoefET. Autonomous cars and dynamic bottleneck congestion: The effects on capacity, value of time and preference heterogeneity. Transp Res Part B Methodol2016; 94: 43–60.
4.
WellerGSchlagB. Road user behavior model. Deliverable D8 project RIPCORDISERET, 6 Framework Programme of the European Union. 2007.
KällhammerJ-E. Night vision: Requirements and possible roadmap for FIR and NIR systems. Photonics Automob II2006; 61980F.
7.
CyganekBGruszczyńskiS. Hybrid computer vision system for drivers’ eye recognition and fatigue monitoring. Neurocomputing2014; 126: 78–94.
8.
MacioszekE. Analysis of significance of differences between psychotechnical parameters for drivers at the entries to one-lane and turbo roundabouts in Poland. Adv Intell Syst Comput2017; 505: 149–161.
9.
MałeckiKNowosielskiAForczmańskiP. Multispectral data acquisition in the assessment of driver’s fatigue. Commun Comput Inf Sci2017; 715: 320–332.
10.
ForczmańskiPKutelskiK. Driver drowsiness estimation by means of face depth map analysis. Adv Intell Syst Comput2019; 889: 396–407.
11.
MałeckiKWa̧tróbskiJ. Mobile system of decision-making on road threats. Procedia Comput Sci2017; 112: 1737–1746.
ForczmańskiPMałeckiK. Selected aspects of traffic signs recognition: Visual versus RFID approach. Commun Comput Inf Sci2013; 395: 268–274.
14.
NowosielskiAMałeckiKForczmańskiP, et al. Pedestrian detection in severe lighting conditions: Comparative study of human performance vs thermal-imaging-based automatic system. Adv Intell Syst Comput2020; 977: 174–183.
15.
NewellGF. Nonlinear effects in the dynamics of car following. Oper Res1961; 9: 209–229.
16.
PengGHSunDH. A dynamical model of car-following with the consideration of the multiple information of preceding cars. Phys Lett Sect A Gen At Solid State Phys2010; 374: 1694–1698.
17.
TangTWangYYangX, et al. A new car-following model accounting for varying road condition. Nonlinear Dyn2012; 70: 1397–1405.
18.
JinSWangDHXuC, et al. Staggered car-following induced by lateral separation effects in traffic flow. Phys Lett Sect A Gen At Solid State Phys2012; 376: 153–157.
19.
ZhouTSunDKangY, et al. A new car-following model with consideration of the prevision driving behavior. Commun Nonlinear Sci Numer Simul2014; 19: 3820–3826.
20.
PengGHChengRJ. A new car-following model with the consideration of anticipation optimal velocity. Phys A Stat Mech its Appl2013; 392: 3563–3569.
21.
TangTQWuYHCaccettaL, et al. A new car-following model with consideration of roadside memorial. Phys Lett Sect A Gen At Solid State Phys2011; 375: 3845–3850.
22.
YuSShiZ. An extended car-following model at signalized intersections. Phys A Stat Mech Appl2014; 407: 152–159.
23.
YuSShiZ. An extended car-following model considering vehicular gap fluctuation. Meas J Int Meas Confed2015; 70: 137–147.
24.
OuHTangTQ. Impacts of moving bottlenecks on traffic flow. Phys A Stat Mech Appl2018; 500: 131–138.
25.
TreiberMKestingA. Modeling lane-changing decisions with MOBIL. In: Traffic and Granular Flow 2007. 2009. Epub ahead of print 2009. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-540-77074-9-19.
26.
TangTShiWShangH, et al. A new car-following model with consideration of inter-vehicle communication. Nonlinear Dyn2014; 76: 2017–2023.
27.
SunYGeHChengR. An extended car-following model under V2V communication environment and its delayed-feedback control. Phys A Stat Mech Appl2018; 508: 349–358.
28.
Wolfram SCN-J or ABRRQ 5. CW 2002. A new kind of science. Champaign: Wolfram Media. Epub ahead of print 2002. DOI: 10.1145/601819.601827.
29.
NagelKSchreckenbergM. A cellular automaton model for freeway traffic. J Phys I1992; 2: 2221–2229.
30.
HoogendoornSPBovyPHL. State-of-the-art of vehicular traffic flow modelling. Proc Inst Mech Eng Part I J Syst Control Eng2001; 215: 283–303.
31.
NagelKWolfDEWagnerP, et al. Two-lane traffic rules for cellular automata: A systematic approach. Phys Rev E - Stat Physics, Plasmas, Fluids, Relat Interdiscip Top1998; 58: 1425–1437.
32.
RickertMNagelKSchreckenbergM, et al. Two lane traffic simulations using cellular automata. Phys A Stat Mech Appl1996; 231: 534–550.
33.
ChowdhuryDWolfDESchreckenbergM. Particle hopping models for two-lane traffic with two kinds of vehicles: Effects of lane-changing rules. Phys A Stat Mech Appl1997; 235: 417–439.
34.
KnospeWSantenLSchadschneiderA, et al. Disorder effects in cellular automata for two-lane traffic. Phys A Stat Mech Appl1999; 265: 614–633.
35.
ZhuHBLeiLDaiSQ. Two-lane traffic simulations with a blockage induced by an accident car. Phys A Stat Mech Appl2009; 388: 2903–2910.
36.
JiaBJiangRWuQS, et al. Honk effect in the two-lane cellular automaton model for traffic flow. Phys A Stat Mech Appl2005; 348: 544–552.
37.
KurataSNagataniT. Spatio-temporal dynamics of jams in two-lane traffic flow with a blockage. Phys A Stat Mech Appl2003; 318: 537–550.
38.
ZhuHBZhangNXWuWJ. A modified two-lane traffic model considering drivers’ personality. Phys A Stat Mech Appl2015; 428: 359–367.
39.
MałeckiK. A computer simulation of traffic flow with on-street parking and drivers’ behaviour based on cellular automata and a multi-agent system. J Comput Sci2018; 28: 32–42.
40.
ZamithMLeal-ToledoRCPCluaE, et al. A new stochastic cellular automata model for traffic flow simulation with drivers’ behavior prediction. J Comput Sci2015; 9: 51–56.
41.
ChouFCShladoverSEBansalG. Coordinated merge control based on V2V communication. In: IEEE Vehicular Networking Conference, VNC. IEEE, pp.1–8.
42.
BauzaRGozalvezJ. Traffic congestion detection in large-scale scenarios using vehicle-to-vehicle communications. J Netw Comput Appl2013; 36: 1295–1307.
43.
TangTQHuangHJZhaoSG, et al. An extended ov model with consideration of driver’s memory. Int J Mod Phys B2009; 23: 743–752.
44.
JiaDNgoduyD. Enhanced cooperative car-following traffic model with the combination of V2V and V2I communication. Transp Res Part B Methodol2016; 90: 172–191.
45.
KnorrFBaseltDSchreckenbergM, et al. Reducing traffic jams via VANETs. IEEE Trans Veh Technol2012; 61: 3490–3498.
46.
HartensteinHLaberteauxKKP. A tutorial survey on vehicular ad hoc networks. Commun Mag2008; 46: 164–171.
47.
ChengS-THorngG-JChouC-L. Using cellular automata to form car society in vehicular ad hoc networks. IEEE Trans Intell Transp Syst2011; 12: 1374–1384.
48.
RegraguiYMoussaN. Modeling and simulation of VANET in traffic city. In: WCCCS 2014 – Proceedings; 2014 5th Workshop on Codes, Cryptography and Communication Systems. IEEE, pp.73–76.
49.
Wa̧sJSirakoulisGC. Cellular automata applications for research and industry. J Comput Sci2015; 11: 223–225.
50.
MałeckiK. Graph cellular automata with relation-based neighbourhoods of cells for complex systems modelling: A case of traffic simulation. Symmetry (Basel); 9. Epub ahead of print 2017. DOI: 10.3390/sym9120322.
51.
LiXWuQJiangR. Cellular automaton model considering the velocity effect of a car on the successive car. Phys Rev E – Stat Physics, Plasmas, Fluids, Relat Interdiscip Top2001; 64: 4.
52.
DaileyDJTaiyabN. Cellular automata model for use with real freeway data (No. WA-RD-537.1). Washington (State). Dept. of Transportation. Research Office2002.
53.
KijewskaKMałeckiKIwanS. Analysis of data needs and having for the integrated urban freight transport management system. In: Challenge of Transport Telematics. CiCIS2016; 640. Cham: Springer, pp.135–148
54.
WagnerP. Traffic simulation using cellular automata: Comparison with reality. Traffic and granular flow. Conference Proceedings, Report No. 95.214, 1995.
55.
DaganzoC. The cell transmission model: A dynamic representation of highway traffic consistent with hydrodynamic theory. Transp Res B. 1994; 28B (4): 269–287.
56.
RobinsonS. Simulation model verification and validation: Increasing the users’ confidence. In: Proceedings of the 29th conference on Winter simulation 1997. IEEE Computer Society, USA, pp.53–59.
