The Myth of Traffic-Responsive Signal Control: Why Common Sense Does Not Always Make Sense.

16 Pages Posted: 4 Sep 2015

See all articles by Ruth Evers

Ruth Evers

KU Leuven - Department of Economics

Stef Proost

KU Leuven - Department of Economics

Date Written: July 2015

Abstract

Intuitively, one is inclined to think that traffic-responsive signal control is the most efficient control policy. In this paper, however, we show that for an intersection of two routes connecting one origin-destination pair where only one route is subject to congestion, anticipatory signal control performs better than traffic-responsive signal control. Furthermore, the unfolded logic behind this result suggests that the superiority of anticipatory signal control also extends to other networks.

Keywords: anticipatory control, Stackelberg game, traffic-responsive control

Suggested Citation

Evers, Ruth and Proost, Stef V., The Myth of Traffic-Responsive Signal Control: Why Common Sense Does Not Always Make Sense. (July 2015). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2655586 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2655586

Ruth Evers (Contact Author)

KU Leuven - Department of Economics ( email )

Leuven, B-3000
Belgium

Stef V. Proost

KU Leuven - Department of Economics ( email )

Leuven, B-3000
Belgium
016 32 66 35 (Phone)
016 32 67 96 (Fax)

Do you have a job opening that you would like to promote on SSRN?

Paper statistics

Downloads
29
Abstract Views
458
PlumX Metrics