Paper detail

PointQ model of an arterial network: calibration and experiments

The calibration of a PointQ arterial microsimulation model is formulated as a quadratic programming problem (QP) whose decision variables are link flows, demands at entry links, and turn movements at intersections, subject to linear constraints imposed by flow conservation identities and field measurements of a subset of link flows (counts), demands and turn ratios. The quadratic objective function is the deviation of the decision variables from their measured values. The solution to the QP gives estimates of all unmeasured variables and thus yields a fully specified simulation model. Runs of this simulation model can then be compared with other field measurements, such as travel times along routes, to judge the reliability of the calibrated model. A section of the Huntington-Colorado arterial near I-210 in Los Angeles comprising 73 links and 16 intersections is used to illustrate the procedure. Two experiments are conducted with the calibrated model to determine the maximum traffic that can be diverted from the I-210 freeway to the arterial network, with and without permitting changes in the timing plans. The maximum diversion in both cases is obtained by solving a linear programming problem. A third experiment compares the delay and travel time using the existing fixed time control and a max pressure control. The fourth experiment compares two PointQ models: in the first model the freeway traffic follows a pre-specified route while the background traffic moves according to turn ratios, and in the second model turn ratios are modified in a single commodity model to match the link flows. The substantial modification of the turn ratios needed suggests that the use of a single-commodity model as frequently done in CTM models can be misleading...

preprint2015arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access5 authors1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.