Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Autonomous Vehicles
Congestion
Avoidance in City
Traffic
Rahul
Kala
rkala.99k.org
Key Contributions
Proposing city traffic as a scenario to
study traffic congestion.
Proposing the importance of considering
traffic lights in decision making
regarding routes.
Proposing a simple routing algorithm
that eliminates the high density of traffic
and hence minimizes congestion.
Stressing frequent short term replanning of the vehicle in place of long
term (complete) infrequent re-planning.
Motion Planning for Multiple Autonomous Vehicles
rkala.99k.org
Assumption
Vehicles have very diverse speeds
Non-recurrent traffic (does not follow
historical traffic patterns)
City traffic scenario
Objective
Minimize non-recurrent congestion
rkala.99k.org
Characteris
tic
Highway Traffic
1.
Infrastructure
Less number of
long length roads
2.
Vehicle
Emergence
3.
Planning
Frequency
High anticipation
favours long term
planning
Low anticipation
invalidates long term
plans
City Traffic
rkala.99k.org
Routing Systems
Limitations
rkala.99k.org
Planning Hypothesis
rkala.99k.org
Traffic Simulation
Driving Speed
Intelligent Driver Model (standard model, converts
vehicle separations into speed)
Lane Change
Choose lane with maximize Time to Collision (if any in
the current)
Stay on the leftmost lane (if currently close to
maximum speed)
This allows other vehicles to overtake (from the right)
rkala.99k.org
rkala.99k.org
B
C
B
A
A
(c) Completion of overtake.
C
Arrows indicate separation checks. Since A and C are moving in opposite direction,
needed separation is much larger.
Motion Planning for Multiple Autonomous Vehicles
rkala.99k.org
Hypothesis
Vehicle Routing
rkala.99k.org
Vehicle Routing
Let:
Arrows denote roads
Line Widths denote current traffic density
Heuristic costs to goal may replace actual costs
after threshold
Route 1: Long, Moderate density, more traffic lights
Source
Goal
Route 2: Short, High traffic density, less traffic
lights
Route 3: Preferable Long, Low traffic density, less
traffic lights
rkala.99k.org
Vehicle Routing
Goal
maxHistorical
Current
position
Origin
Current
position
Selected
Path
maxHistorical
Selected
Path
Selected
Path
rkala.99k.org
Comparisons
S.
No.
Method
Objective/ Frequency
1.
Optimistic (static)
2.
Pessimistic (static)
3.
Traffic Messaging
Channel (TMC, static)
4.
TMC (dynamic)
5.
Density (dynamic)
6.
7.
Results
25
20
pressimistic
15
TMC static
TMC dynamic
TMC with traffic lights
density
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
rkala.99k.org
Results
4.5
4
3.5
pressimistic
3
TMC static
2.5
Average Distance
2 Travelled (miles)
TMC dynamic
1.5
1
0.5
0
density
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
density with
traffic lights
rkala.99k.org
Results
20
Average Speed
18
optimistic
16
14
pressimistic
12
TMC static
10 Speed (miles/hr)
Average
8
TMC dynamic
TMC with traffic
lights
6
4
density
2
0
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
rkala.99k.org
Results
Average Time of Completion of Journey
25
20
15
Average Time of completion of journey (minutes)
10
with overtaking
without overtaking
5
0
Number of vehicles per second
rkala.99k.org
Acknowledgements:
Commonwealth Scholarship
Commission in the United Kingdom
British Council
Thank You
Motion Planning for Multiple Autonomous Vehicles
rkala.99k.org