Modeling Dynamic Vehicle Navigation in a Self-Organizing, Peer-to-Peer, Distributed Traffic Information System

Autonet: inter-vehicle communication and network vehicular traffic

“…As shown in (Yang and Recker, 2006b), the simulation results hold significant promise for the efficacy of the system. As an example, results in Figure 5 are for a 5,000m × 5,000m grid network with 1,000m blocks, for the case of an incident at the center of the network and uniform origin-destination pattern.…”

“…This is an outcome of the IVC-capable vehicles' travel time savings from re-routing and the travel time savings for non-IVC vehicles whose paths include the incident link (now with less demand as a result of IVC-capable vehicles rerouting) being greater than the increased travel time on the links comprising the IVCcapable vehicles' re-routing paths. Impact of IVC on total system travel time (Freeway with moderate traffic) (Yang and Recker, 2006b) …”

Message forwarding based on vehicle trajectory history in Fully Distributed Traffic Information Systems

“…This is why it makes sense to investigate distributed data transmission solutions (i.e., users can collaborate without any central mediator). For example, [16,5,3,14] and many others have studied such systems.…”

Impact of Distributed Routing of Intelligent Vehicles on Urban Traffic

“…In 2006, a study by Metrolinx estimated that in 2031 cost to commuters and economy will sky rocket and reach $7.8, and $7.2 respectively in the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area [1]. It has been shown that the higher the efficiency of a routing system, the less the congestion and better the network performance and smaller travel time [2]. In literature, distributed routing systems were shown to overcome many of the centralized routing systems shortcomings that are mainly: the massive capital investment required to build a centralized system, high sensitivity to system failures, complexity of system upgrades, and lack of relativeness of information to a specific trip in general [2].…”