Optimizing distribution of metered traffic flow in perimeter control: Queue and delay balancing approaches
Perimeter traffic flow control based on the macroscopic or network fundamental diagram provides the opportunity of operating an urban traffic network at its capacity. Because perimeter control operates on the basis of restricting inflow via reduced green times at selected entry (gated) links, vehicl...
Ausführliche Beschreibung
Gespeichert in:
| Autor*in: |
Keyvan-Ekbatani, Mehdi [verfasserIn] Carlson, Rodrigo Castelan [verfasserIn] Knoop, Victor L. [verfasserIn] Papageorgiou, Markos [verfasserIn] |
|---|
| Format: |
E-Artikel |
|---|---|
| Sprache: |
Englisch |
| Erschienen: |
2021 |
|---|
| Schlagwörter: |
Perimeter traffic flow control |
|---|
| Übergeordnetes Werk: |
Enthalten in: Control engineering practice - Amsterdam [u.a.] : Elsevier Science, 1993, 110 |
|---|---|
| Übergeordnetes Werk: |
volume:110 |
| DOI / URN: |
10.1016/j.conengprac.2021.104762 |
|---|
| Katalog-ID: |
ELV00572175X |
|---|
| LEADER | 01000caa a22002652 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | ELV00572175X | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20230524161126.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 230504s2021 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.1016/j.conengprac.2021.104762 |2 doi | |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)ELV00572175X | ||
| 035 | |a (ELSEVIER)S0967-0661(21)00039-3 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rda | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 082 | 0 | 4 | |a 620 |q DE-600 |
| 084 | |a 50.23 |2 bkl | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Keyvan-Ekbatani, Mehdi |e verfasserin |0 (orcid)0000-0001-5482-3617 |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Optimizing distribution of metered traffic flow in perimeter control: Queue and delay balancing approaches |
| 264 | 1 | |c 2021 | |
| 336 | |a nicht spezifiziert |b zzz |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a Computermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 520 | |a Perimeter traffic flow control based on the macroscopic or network fundamental diagram provides the opportunity of operating an urban traffic network at its capacity. Because perimeter control operates on the basis of restricting inflow via reduced green times at selected entry (gated) links, vehicles on those links may be subject to queuing and delay. The experienced delay or resulting queue lengths depend on the adopted policy for the distribution of the inflows and corresponding green times at the gated links. The chosen policy may have a significant impact on the traffic system under control. For example, managing queue lengths may reduce the interference with upstream traffic whereas the management of delays may improve users’ perception with respect to equity and fairness. In this paper, an approach has been proposed to distribute the gated flow based on the queue lengths or experienced delay at the gated signalized junctions. This is in contrast to standard practice that distributes inflows proportionally to the gated links’ saturation flows. Perimeter control is then evaluated in a microscopic simulator for a realistic traffic network and compared in three configurations against fixed-time: perimeter control without queue or delay management; perimeter control with relative queue balancing; and perimeter control with delay balancing. It has been found that managing the queues at the gated links not only improves the overall network performance but also reduces the possibility of queue propagation to the upstream junctions. This improves traffic flow outside the protected network by managing the queue propagation at the gated links and reducing the possibility of queue spill-back to upstream intersections. In addition, the results indicate that perimeter control with delay balancing has a similar performance as the case without queue or delay management being a suitable approach for flow distribution among the gated links. In the scenarios with perimeter control with either queue or delay balancing the gap between the ordered flow by the controller and the actual flow crossing the stop-line at the gated links reduced remarkably. | ||
| 650 | 4 | |a Urban traffic control | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Perimeter traffic flow control | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Macroscopic or network fundamental diagram | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Optimization | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Carlson, Rodrigo Castelan |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Knoop, Victor L. |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Papageorgiou, Markos |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t Control engineering practice |d Amsterdam [u.a.] : Elsevier Science, 1993 |g 110 |h Online-Ressource |w (DE-627)306716119 |w (DE-600)1501351-0 |w (DE-576)259271012 |x 1873-6939 |7 nnns |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:110 |
| 912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_U | ||
| 912 | |a SYSFLAG_U | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ELV | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_20 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_22 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_23 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_24 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_31 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_32 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_40 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_60 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_62 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_63 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_65 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_69 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_70 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_73 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_74 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_90 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_95 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_100 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_105 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_110 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_150 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_151 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_224 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_370 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_602 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_702 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2003 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2004 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2005 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2006 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2008 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2010 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2011 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2014 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2015 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2020 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2021 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2025 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2027 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2034 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2038 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2044 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2048 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2049 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2050 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2056 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2059 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2061 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2064 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2065 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2068 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2088 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2111 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2112 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2113 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2118 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2122 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2129 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2143 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2147 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2148 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2152 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2153 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2190 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2336 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2470 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2507 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_2522 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4035 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4037 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4046 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4112 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4125 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4126 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4242 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4251 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4305 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4313 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4322 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4323 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4324 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4325 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4326 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4333 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4334 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4335 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4338 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4393 | ||
| 936 | b | k | |a 50.23 |j Regelungstechnik |j Steuerungstechnik |
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| 952 | |d 110 | ||
| author_variant |
m k e mke r c c rc rcc v l k vl vlk m p mp |
|---|---|
| matchkey_str |
article:18736939:2021----::piiigitiuinfeeetafclwneieecnrluuad |
| hierarchy_sort_str |
2021 |
| bklnumber |
50.23 |
| publishDate |
2021 |
| allfields |
10.1016/j.conengprac.2021.104762 doi (DE-627)ELV00572175X (ELSEVIER)S0967-0661(21)00039-3 DE-627 ger DE-627 rda eng 620 DE-600 50.23 bkl Keyvan-Ekbatani, Mehdi verfasserin (orcid)0000-0001-5482-3617 aut Optimizing distribution of metered traffic flow in perimeter control: Queue and delay balancing approaches 2021 nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Perimeter traffic flow control based on the macroscopic or network fundamental diagram provides the opportunity of operating an urban traffic network at its capacity. Because perimeter control operates on the basis of restricting inflow via reduced green times at selected entry (gated) links, vehicles on those links may be subject to queuing and delay. The experienced delay or resulting queue lengths depend on the adopted policy for the distribution of the inflows and corresponding green times at the gated links. The chosen policy may have a significant impact on the traffic system under control. For example, managing queue lengths may reduce the interference with upstream traffic whereas the management of delays may improve users’ perception with respect to equity and fairness. In this paper, an approach has been proposed to distribute the gated flow based on the queue lengths or experienced delay at the gated signalized junctions. This is in contrast to standard practice that distributes inflows proportionally to the gated links’ saturation flows. Perimeter control is then evaluated in a microscopic simulator for a realistic traffic network and compared in three configurations against fixed-time: perimeter control without queue or delay management; perimeter control with relative queue balancing; and perimeter control with delay balancing. It has been found that managing the queues at the gated links not only improves the overall network performance but also reduces the possibility of queue propagation to the upstream junctions. This improves traffic flow outside the protected network by managing the queue propagation at the gated links and reducing the possibility of queue spill-back to upstream intersections. In addition, the results indicate that perimeter control with delay balancing has a similar performance as the case without queue or delay management being a suitable approach for flow distribution among the gated links. In the scenarios with perimeter control with either queue or delay balancing the gap between the ordered flow by the controller and the actual flow crossing the stop-line at the gated links reduced remarkably. Urban traffic control Perimeter traffic flow control Macroscopic or network fundamental diagram Optimization Carlson, Rodrigo Castelan verfasserin aut Knoop, Victor L. verfasserin aut Papageorgiou, Markos verfasserin aut Enthalten in Control engineering practice Amsterdam [u.a.] : Elsevier Science, 1993 110 Online-Ressource (DE-627)306716119 (DE-600)1501351-0 (DE-576)259271012 1873-6939 nnns volume:110 GBV_USEFLAG_U SYSFLAG_U GBV_ELV GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_32 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_90 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_150 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_224 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2004 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2006 GBV_ILN_2008 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2015 GBV_ILN_2020 GBV_ILN_2021 GBV_ILN_2025 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_2034 GBV_ILN_2038 GBV_ILN_2044 GBV_ILN_2048 GBV_ILN_2049 GBV_ILN_2050 GBV_ILN_2056 GBV_ILN_2059 GBV_ILN_2061 GBV_ILN_2064 GBV_ILN_2065 GBV_ILN_2068 GBV_ILN_2088 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2112 GBV_ILN_2113 GBV_ILN_2118 GBV_ILN_2122 GBV_ILN_2129 GBV_ILN_2143 GBV_ILN_2147 GBV_ILN_2148 GBV_ILN_2152 GBV_ILN_2153 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2336 GBV_ILN_2470 GBV_ILN_2507 GBV_ILN_2522 GBV_ILN_4035 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4046 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4242 GBV_ILN_4251 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4333 GBV_ILN_4334 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4393 50.23 Regelungstechnik Steuerungstechnik AR 110 |
| spelling |
10.1016/j.conengprac.2021.104762 doi (DE-627)ELV00572175X (ELSEVIER)S0967-0661(21)00039-3 DE-627 ger DE-627 rda eng 620 DE-600 50.23 bkl Keyvan-Ekbatani, Mehdi verfasserin (orcid)0000-0001-5482-3617 aut Optimizing distribution of metered traffic flow in perimeter control: Queue and delay balancing approaches 2021 nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Perimeter traffic flow control based on the macroscopic or network fundamental diagram provides the opportunity of operating an urban traffic network at its capacity. Because perimeter control operates on the basis of restricting inflow via reduced green times at selected entry (gated) links, vehicles on those links may be subject to queuing and delay. The experienced delay or resulting queue lengths depend on the adopted policy for the distribution of the inflows and corresponding green times at the gated links. The chosen policy may have a significant impact on the traffic system under control. For example, managing queue lengths may reduce the interference with upstream traffic whereas the management of delays may improve users’ perception with respect to equity and fairness. In this paper, an approach has been proposed to distribute the gated flow based on the queue lengths or experienced delay at the gated signalized junctions. This is in contrast to standard practice that distributes inflows proportionally to the gated links’ saturation flows. Perimeter control is then evaluated in a microscopic simulator for a realistic traffic network and compared in three configurations against fixed-time: perimeter control without queue or delay management; perimeter control with relative queue balancing; and perimeter control with delay balancing. It has been found that managing the queues at the gated links not only improves the overall network performance but also reduces the possibility of queue propagation to the upstream junctions. This improves traffic flow outside the protected network by managing the queue propagation at the gated links and reducing the possibility of queue spill-back to upstream intersections. In addition, the results indicate that perimeter control with delay balancing has a similar performance as the case without queue or delay management being a suitable approach for flow distribution among the gated links. In the scenarios with perimeter control with either queue or delay balancing the gap between the ordered flow by the controller and the actual flow crossing the stop-line at the gated links reduced remarkably. Urban traffic control Perimeter traffic flow control Macroscopic or network fundamental diagram Optimization Carlson, Rodrigo Castelan verfasserin aut Knoop, Victor L. verfasserin aut Papageorgiou, Markos verfasserin aut Enthalten in Control engineering practice Amsterdam [u.a.] : Elsevier Science, 1993 110 Online-Ressource (DE-627)306716119 (DE-600)1501351-0 (DE-576)259271012 1873-6939 nnns volume:110 GBV_USEFLAG_U SYSFLAG_U GBV_ELV GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_32 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_90 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_150 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_224 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2004 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2006 GBV_ILN_2008 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2015 GBV_ILN_2020 GBV_ILN_2021 GBV_ILN_2025 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_2034 GBV_ILN_2038 GBV_ILN_2044 GBV_ILN_2048 GBV_ILN_2049 GBV_ILN_2050 GBV_ILN_2056 GBV_ILN_2059 GBV_ILN_2061 GBV_ILN_2064 GBV_ILN_2065 GBV_ILN_2068 GBV_ILN_2088 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2112 GBV_ILN_2113 GBV_ILN_2118 GBV_ILN_2122 GBV_ILN_2129 GBV_ILN_2143 GBV_ILN_2147 GBV_ILN_2148 GBV_ILN_2152 GBV_ILN_2153 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2336 GBV_ILN_2470 GBV_ILN_2507 GBV_ILN_2522 GBV_ILN_4035 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4046 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4242 GBV_ILN_4251 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4333 GBV_ILN_4334 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4393 50.23 Regelungstechnik Steuerungstechnik AR 110 |
| allfields_unstemmed |
10.1016/j.conengprac.2021.104762 doi (DE-627)ELV00572175X (ELSEVIER)S0967-0661(21)00039-3 DE-627 ger DE-627 rda eng 620 DE-600 50.23 bkl Keyvan-Ekbatani, Mehdi verfasserin (orcid)0000-0001-5482-3617 aut Optimizing distribution of metered traffic flow in perimeter control: Queue and delay balancing approaches 2021 nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Perimeter traffic flow control based on the macroscopic or network fundamental diagram provides the opportunity of operating an urban traffic network at its capacity. Because perimeter control operates on the basis of restricting inflow via reduced green times at selected entry (gated) links, vehicles on those links may be subject to queuing and delay. The experienced delay or resulting queue lengths depend on the adopted policy for the distribution of the inflows and corresponding green times at the gated links. The chosen policy may have a significant impact on the traffic system under control. For example, managing queue lengths may reduce the interference with upstream traffic whereas the management of delays may improve users’ perception with respect to equity and fairness. In this paper, an approach has been proposed to distribute the gated flow based on the queue lengths or experienced delay at the gated signalized junctions. This is in contrast to standard practice that distributes inflows proportionally to the gated links’ saturation flows. Perimeter control is then evaluated in a microscopic simulator for a realistic traffic network and compared in three configurations against fixed-time: perimeter control without queue or delay management; perimeter control with relative queue balancing; and perimeter control with delay balancing. It has been found that managing the queues at the gated links not only improves the overall network performance but also reduces the possibility of queue propagation to the upstream junctions. This improves traffic flow outside the protected network by managing the queue propagation at the gated links and reducing the possibility of queue spill-back to upstream intersections. In addition, the results indicate that perimeter control with delay balancing has a similar performance as the case without queue or delay management being a suitable approach for flow distribution among the gated links. In the scenarios with perimeter control with either queue or delay balancing the gap between the ordered flow by the controller and the actual flow crossing the stop-line at the gated links reduced remarkably. Urban traffic control Perimeter traffic flow control Macroscopic or network fundamental diagram Optimization Carlson, Rodrigo Castelan verfasserin aut Knoop, Victor L. verfasserin aut Papageorgiou, Markos verfasserin aut Enthalten in Control engineering practice Amsterdam [u.a.] : Elsevier Science, 1993 110 Online-Ressource (DE-627)306716119 (DE-600)1501351-0 (DE-576)259271012 1873-6939 nnns volume:110 GBV_USEFLAG_U SYSFLAG_U GBV_ELV GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_32 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_90 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_150 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_224 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2004 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2006 GBV_ILN_2008 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2015 GBV_ILN_2020 GBV_ILN_2021 GBV_ILN_2025 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_2034 GBV_ILN_2038 GBV_ILN_2044 GBV_ILN_2048 GBV_ILN_2049 GBV_ILN_2050 GBV_ILN_2056 GBV_ILN_2059 GBV_ILN_2061 GBV_ILN_2064 GBV_ILN_2065 GBV_ILN_2068 GBV_ILN_2088 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2112 GBV_ILN_2113 GBV_ILN_2118 GBV_ILN_2122 GBV_ILN_2129 GBV_ILN_2143 GBV_ILN_2147 GBV_ILN_2148 GBV_ILN_2152 GBV_ILN_2153 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2336 GBV_ILN_2470 GBV_ILN_2507 GBV_ILN_2522 GBV_ILN_4035 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4046 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4242 GBV_ILN_4251 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4333 GBV_ILN_4334 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4393 50.23 Regelungstechnik Steuerungstechnik AR 110 |
| allfieldsGer |
10.1016/j.conengprac.2021.104762 doi (DE-627)ELV00572175X (ELSEVIER)S0967-0661(21)00039-3 DE-627 ger DE-627 rda eng 620 DE-600 50.23 bkl Keyvan-Ekbatani, Mehdi verfasserin (orcid)0000-0001-5482-3617 aut Optimizing distribution of metered traffic flow in perimeter control: Queue and delay balancing approaches 2021 nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Perimeter traffic flow control based on the macroscopic or network fundamental diagram provides the opportunity of operating an urban traffic network at its capacity. Because perimeter control operates on the basis of restricting inflow via reduced green times at selected entry (gated) links, vehicles on those links may be subject to queuing and delay. The experienced delay or resulting queue lengths depend on the adopted policy for the distribution of the inflows and corresponding green times at the gated links. The chosen policy may have a significant impact on the traffic system under control. For example, managing queue lengths may reduce the interference with upstream traffic whereas the management of delays may improve users’ perception with respect to equity and fairness. In this paper, an approach has been proposed to distribute the gated flow based on the queue lengths or experienced delay at the gated signalized junctions. This is in contrast to standard practice that distributes inflows proportionally to the gated links’ saturation flows. Perimeter control is then evaluated in a microscopic simulator for a realistic traffic network and compared in three configurations against fixed-time: perimeter control without queue or delay management; perimeter control with relative queue balancing; and perimeter control with delay balancing. It has been found that managing the queues at the gated links not only improves the overall network performance but also reduces the possibility of queue propagation to the upstream junctions. This improves traffic flow outside the protected network by managing the queue propagation at the gated links and reducing the possibility of queue spill-back to upstream intersections. In addition, the results indicate that perimeter control with delay balancing has a similar performance as the case without queue or delay management being a suitable approach for flow distribution among the gated links. In the scenarios with perimeter control with either queue or delay balancing the gap between the ordered flow by the controller and the actual flow crossing the stop-line at the gated links reduced remarkably. Urban traffic control Perimeter traffic flow control Macroscopic or network fundamental diagram Optimization Carlson, Rodrigo Castelan verfasserin aut Knoop, Victor L. verfasserin aut Papageorgiou, Markos verfasserin aut Enthalten in Control engineering practice Amsterdam [u.a.] : Elsevier Science, 1993 110 Online-Ressource (DE-627)306716119 (DE-600)1501351-0 (DE-576)259271012 1873-6939 nnns volume:110 GBV_USEFLAG_U SYSFLAG_U GBV_ELV GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_32 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_90 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_150 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_224 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2004 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2006 GBV_ILN_2008 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2015 GBV_ILN_2020 GBV_ILN_2021 GBV_ILN_2025 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_2034 GBV_ILN_2038 GBV_ILN_2044 GBV_ILN_2048 GBV_ILN_2049 GBV_ILN_2050 GBV_ILN_2056 GBV_ILN_2059 GBV_ILN_2061 GBV_ILN_2064 GBV_ILN_2065 GBV_ILN_2068 GBV_ILN_2088 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2112 GBV_ILN_2113 GBV_ILN_2118 GBV_ILN_2122 GBV_ILN_2129 GBV_ILN_2143 GBV_ILN_2147 GBV_ILN_2148 GBV_ILN_2152 GBV_ILN_2153 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2336 GBV_ILN_2470 GBV_ILN_2507 GBV_ILN_2522 GBV_ILN_4035 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4046 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4242 GBV_ILN_4251 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4333 GBV_ILN_4334 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4393 50.23 Regelungstechnik Steuerungstechnik AR 110 |
| allfieldsSound |
10.1016/j.conengprac.2021.104762 doi (DE-627)ELV00572175X (ELSEVIER)S0967-0661(21)00039-3 DE-627 ger DE-627 rda eng 620 DE-600 50.23 bkl Keyvan-Ekbatani, Mehdi verfasserin (orcid)0000-0001-5482-3617 aut Optimizing distribution of metered traffic flow in perimeter control: Queue and delay balancing approaches 2021 nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Perimeter traffic flow control based on the macroscopic or network fundamental diagram provides the opportunity of operating an urban traffic network at its capacity. Because perimeter control operates on the basis of restricting inflow via reduced green times at selected entry (gated) links, vehicles on those links may be subject to queuing and delay. The experienced delay or resulting queue lengths depend on the adopted policy for the distribution of the inflows and corresponding green times at the gated links. The chosen policy may have a significant impact on the traffic system under control. For example, managing queue lengths may reduce the interference with upstream traffic whereas the management of delays may improve users’ perception with respect to equity and fairness. In this paper, an approach has been proposed to distribute the gated flow based on the queue lengths or experienced delay at the gated signalized junctions. This is in contrast to standard practice that distributes inflows proportionally to the gated links’ saturation flows. Perimeter control is then evaluated in a microscopic simulator for a realistic traffic network and compared in three configurations against fixed-time: perimeter control without queue or delay management; perimeter control with relative queue balancing; and perimeter control with delay balancing. It has been found that managing the queues at the gated links not only improves the overall network performance but also reduces the possibility of queue propagation to the upstream junctions. This improves traffic flow outside the protected network by managing the queue propagation at the gated links and reducing the possibility of queue spill-back to upstream intersections. In addition, the results indicate that perimeter control with delay balancing has a similar performance as the case without queue or delay management being a suitable approach for flow distribution among the gated links. In the scenarios with perimeter control with either queue or delay balancing the gap between the ordered flow by the controller and the actual flow crossing the stop-line at the gated links reduced remarkably. Urban traffic control Perimeter traffic flow control Macroscopic or network fundamental diagram Optimization Carlson, Rodrigo Castelan verfasserin aut Knoop, Victor L. verfasserin aut Papageorgiou, Markos verfasserin aut Enthalten in Control engineering practice Amsterdam [u.a.] : Elsevier Science, 1993 110 Online-Ressource (DE-627)306716119 (DE-600)1501351-0 (DE-576)259271012 1873-6939 nnns volume:110 GBV_USEFLAG_U SYSFLAG_U GBV_ELV GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_32 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_90 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_150 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_224 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2004 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2006 GBV_ILN_2008 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2015 GBV_ILN_2020 GBV_ILN_2021 GBV_ILN_2025 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_2034 GBV_ILN_2038 GBV_ILN_2044 GBV_ILN_2048 GBV_ILN_2049 GBV_ILN_2050 GBV_ILN_2056 GBV_ILN_2059 GBV_ILN_2061 GBV_ILN_2064 GBV_ILN_2065 GBV_ILN_2068 GBV_ILN_2088 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2112 GBV_ILN_2113 GBV_ILN_2118 GBV_ILN_2122 GBV_ILN_2129 GBV_ILN_2143 GBV_ILN_2147 GBV_ILN_2148 GBV_ILN_2152 GBV_ILN_2153 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2336 GBV_ILN_2470 GBV_ILN_2507 GBV_ILN_2522 GBV_ILN_4035 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4046 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4242 GBV_ILN_4251 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4333 GBV_ILN_4334 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4393 50.23 Regelungstechnik Steuerungstechnik AR 110 |
| language |
English |
| source |
Enthalten in Control engineering practice 110 volume:110 |
| sourceStr |
Enthalten in Control engineering practice 110 volume:110 |
| format_phy_str_mv |
Article |
| bklname |
Regelungstechnik Steuerungstechnik |
| institution |
findex.gbv.de |
| topic_facet |
Urban traffic control Perimeter traffic flow control Macroscopic or network fundamental diagram Optimization |
| dewey-raw |
620 |
| isfreeaccess_bool |
false |
| container_title |
Control engineering practice |
| authorswithroles_txt_mv |
Keyvan-Ekbatani, Mehdi @@aut@@ Carlson, Rodrigo Castelan @@aut@@ Knoop, Victor L. @@aut@@ Papageorgiou, Markos @@aut@@ |
| publishDateDaySort_date |
2021-01-01T00:00:00Z |
| hierarchy_top_id |
306716119 |
| dewey-sort |
3620 |
| id |
ELV00572175X |
| language_de |
englisch |
| fullrecord |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">ELV00572175X</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230524161126.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">230504s2021 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1016/j.conengprac.2021.104762</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)ELV00572175X</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(ELSEVIER)S0967-0661(21)00039-3</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rda</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">620</subfield><subfield code="q">DE-600</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">50.23</subfield><subfield code="2">bkl</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Keyvan-Ekbatani, Mehdi</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="0">(orcid)0000-0001-5482-3617</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Optimizing distribution of metered traffic flow in perimeter control: Queue and delay balancing approaches</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2021</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">zzz</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Perimeter traffic flow control based on the macroscopic or network fundamental diagram provides the opportunity of operating an urban traffic network at its capacity. Because perimeter control operates on the basis of restricting inflow via reduced green times at selected entry (gated) links, vehicles on those links may be subject to queuing and delay. The experienced delay or resulting queue lengths depend on the adopted policy for the distribution of the inflows and corresponding green times at the gated links. The chosen policy may have a significant impact on the traffic system under control. For example, managing queue lengths may reduce the interference with upstream traffic whereas the management of delays may improve users’ perception with respect to equity and fairness. In this paper, an approach has been proposed to distribute the gated flow based on the queue lengths or experienced delay at the gated signalized junctions. This is in contrast to standard practice that distributes inflows proportionally to the gated links’ saturation flows. Perimeter control is then evaluated in a microscopic simulator for a realistic traffic network and compared in three configurations against fixed-time: perimeter control without queue or delay management; perimeter control with relative queue balancing; and perimeter control with delay balancing. It has been found that managing the queues at the gated links not only improves the overall network performance but also reduces the possibility of queue propagation to the upstream junctions. This improves traffic flow outside the protected network by managing the queue propagation at the gated links and reducing the possibility of queue spill-back to upstream intersections. In addition, the results indicate that perimeter control with delay balancing has a similar performance as the case without queue or delay management being a suitable approach for flow distribution among the gated links. In the scenarios with perimeter control with either queue or delay balancing the gap between the ordered flow by the controller and the actual flow crossing the stop-line at the gated links reduced remarkably.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Urban traffic control</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Perimeter traffic flow control</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Macroscopic or network fundamental diagram</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Optimization</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Carlson, Rodrigo Castelan</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Knoop, Victor L.</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Papageorgiou, Markos</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="t">Control engineering practice</subfield><subfield code="d">Amsterdam [u.a.] : Elsevier Science, 1993</subfield><subfield code="g">110</subfield><subfield code="h">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)306716119</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)1501351-0</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-576)259271012</subfield><subfield code="x">1873-6939</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_U</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_U</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ELV</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_31</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_32</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_70</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_74</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_90</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_100</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_150</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_224</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_370</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_702</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2003</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2004</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2005</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2006</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2008</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2010</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2011</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2015</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2020</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2021</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2025</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2027</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2034</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2038</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2044</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2048</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2049</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2050</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2056</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2059</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2061</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2064</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2065</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2068</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2088</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2111</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2113</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2118</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2122</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2129</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2143</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2147</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2148</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2152</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2153</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2190</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2336</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2470</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2507</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2522</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4035</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4046</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4242</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4251</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4326</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4333</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4334</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4335</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4393</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="936" ind1="b" ind2="k"><subfield code="a">50.23</subfield><subfield code="j">Regelungstechnik</subfield><subfield code="j">Steuerungstechnik</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">110</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
| author |
Keyvan-Ekbatani, Mehdi |
| spellingShingle |
Keyvan-Ekbatani, Mehdi ddc 620 bkl 50.23 misc Urban traffic control misc Perimeter traffic flow control misc Macroscopic or network fundamental diagram misc Optimization Optimizing distribution of metered traffic flow in perimeter control: Queue and delay balancing approaches |
| authorStr |
Keyvan-Ekbatani, Mehdi |
| ppnlink_with_tag_str_mv |
@@773@@(DE-627)306716119 |
| format |
electronic Article |
| dewey-ones |
620 - Engineering & allied operations |
| delete_txt_mv |
keep |
| author_role |
aut aut aut aut |
| collection |
elsevier |
| remote_str |
true |
| illustrated |
Not Illustrated |
| issn |
1873-6939 |
| topic_title |
620 DE-600 50.23 bkl Optimizing distribution of metered traffic flow in perimeter control: Queue and delay balancing approaches Urban traffic control Perimeter traffic flow control Macroscopic or network fundamental diagram Optimization |
| topic |
ddc 620 bkl 50.23 misc Urban traffic control misc Perimeter traffic flow control misc Macroscopic or network fundamental diagram misc Optimization |
| topic_unstemmed |
ddc 620 bkl 50.23 misc Urban traffic control misc Perimeter traffic flow control misc Macroscopic or network fundamental diagram misc Optimization |
| topic_browse |
ddc 620 bkl 50.23 misc Urban traffic control misc Perimeter traffic flow control misc Macroscopic or network fundamental diagram misc Optimization |
| format_facet |
Elektronische Aufsätze Aufsätze Elektronische Ressource |
| format_main_str_mv |
Text Zeitschrift/Artikel |
| carriertype_str_mv |
cr |
| hierarchy_parent_title |
Control engineering practice |
| hierarchy_parent_id |
306716119 |
| dewey-tens |
620 - Engineering |
| hierarchy_top_title |
Control engineering practice |
| isfreeaccess_txt |
false |
| familylinks_str_mv |
(DE-627)306716119 (DE-600)1501351-0 (DE-576)259271012 |
| title |
Optimizing distribution of metered traffic flow in perimeter control: Queue and delay balancing approaches |
| ctrlnum |
(DE-627)ELV00572175X (ELSEVIER)S0967-0661(21)00039-3 |
| title_full |
Optimizing distribution of metered traffic flow in perimeter control: Queue and delay balancing approaches |
| author_sort |
Keyvan-Ekbatani, Mehdi |
| journal |
Control engineering practice |
| journalStr |
Control engineering practice |
| lang_code |
eng |
| isOA_bool |
false |
| dewey-hundreds |
600 - Technology |
| recordtype |
marc |
| publishDateSort |
2021 |
| contenttype_str_mv |
zzz |
| author_browse |
Keyvan-Ekbatani, Mehdi Carlson, Rodrigo Castelan Knoop, Victor L. Papageorgiou, Markos |
| container_volume |
110 |
| class |
620 DE-600 50.23 bkl |
| format_se |
Elektronische Aufsätze |
| author-letter |
Keyvan-Ekbatani, Mehdi |
| doi_str_mv |
10.1016/j.conengprac.2021.104762 |
| normlink |
(ORCID)0000-0001-5482-3617 |
| normlink_prefix_str_mv |
(orcid)0000-0001-5482-3617 |
| dewey-full |
620 |
| author2-role |
verfasserin |
| title_sort |
optimizing distribution of metered traffic flow in perimeter control: queue and delay balancing approaches |
| title_auth |
Optimizing distribution of metered traffic flow in perimeter control: Queue and delay balancing approaches |
| abstract |
Perimeter traffic flow control based on the macroscopic or network fundamental diagram provides the opportunity of operating an urban traffic network at its capacity. Because perimeter control operates on the basis of restricting inflow via reduced green times at selected entry (gated) links, vehicles on those links may be subject to queuing and delay. The experienced delay or resulting queue lengths depend on the adopted policy for the distribution of the inflows and corresponding green times at the gated links. The chosen policy may have a significant impact on the traffic system under control. For example, managing queue lengths may reduce the interference with upstream traffic whereas the management of delays may improve users’ perception with respect to equity and fairness. In this paper, an approach has been proposed to distribute the gated flow based on the queue lengths or experienced delay at the gated signalized junctions. This is in contrast to standard practice that distributes inflows proportionally to the gated links’ saturation flows. Perimeter control is then evaluated in a microscopic simulator for a realistic traffic network and compared in three configurations against fixed-time: perimeter control without queue or delay management; perimeter control with relative queue balancing; and perimeter control with delay balancing. It has been found that managing the queues at the gated links not only improves the overall network performance but also reduces the possibility of queue propagation to the upstream junctions. This improves traffic flow outside the protected network by managing the queue propagation at the gated links and reducing the possibility of queue spill-back to upstream intersections. In addition, the results indicate that perimeter control with delay balancing has a similar performance as the case without queue or delay management being a suitable approach for flow distribution among the gated links. In the scenarios with perimeter control with either queue or delay balancing the gap between the ordered flow by the controller and the actual flow crossing the stop-line at the gated links reduced remarkably. |
| abstractGer |
Perimeter traffic flow control based on the macroscopic or network fundamental diagram provides the opportunity of operating an urban traffic network at its capacity. Because perimeter control operates on the basis of restricting inflow via reduced green times at selected entry (gated) links, vehicles on those links may be subject to queuing and delay. The experienced delay or resulting queue lengths depend on the adopted policy for the distribution of the inflows and corresponding green times at the gated links. The chosen policy may have a significant impact on the traffic system under control. For example, managing queue lengths may reduce the interference with upstream traffic whereas the management of delays may improve users’ perception with respect to equity and fairness. In this paper, an approach has been proposed to distribute the gated flow based on the queue lengths or experienced delay at the gated signalized junctions. This is in contrast to standard practice that distributes inflows proportionally to the gated links’ saturation flows. Perimeter control is then evaluated in a microscopic simulator for a realistic traffic network and compared in three configurations against fixed-time: perimeter control without queue or delay management; perimeter control with relative queue balancing; and perimeter control with delay balancing. It has been found that managing the queues at the gated links not only improves the overall network performance but also reduces the possibility of queue propagation to the upstream junctions. This improves traffic flow outside the protected network by managing the queue propagation at the gated links and reducing the possibility of queue spill-back to upstream intersections. In addition, the results indicate that perimeter control with delay balancing has a similar performance as the case without queue or delay management being a suitable approach for flow distribution among the gated links. In the scenarios with perimeter control with either queue or delay balancing the gap between the ordered flow by the controller and the actual flow crossing the stop-line at the gated links reduced remarkably. |
| abstract_unstemmed |
Perimeter traffic flow control based on the macroscopic or network fundamental diagram provides the opportunity of operating an urban traffic network at its capacity. Because perimeter control operates on the basis of restricting inflow via reduced green times at selected entry (gated) links, vehicles on those links may be subject to queuing and delay. The experienced delay or resulting queue lengths depend on the adopted policy for the distribution of the inflows and corresponding green times at the gated links. The chosen policy may have a significant impact on the traffic system under control. For example, managing queue lengths may reduce the interference with upstream traffic whereas the management of delays may improve users’ perception with respect to equity and fairness. In this paper, an approach has been proposed to distribute the gated flow based on the queue lengths or experienced delay at the gated signalized junctions. This is in contrast to standard practice that distributes inflows proportionally to the gated links’ saturation flows. Perimeter control is then evaluated in a microscopic simulator for a realistic traffic network and compared in three configurations against fixed-time: perimeter control without queue or delay management; perimeter control with relative queue balancing; and perimeter control with delay balancing. It has been found that managing the queues at the gated links not only improves the overall network performance but also reduces the possibility of queue propagation to the upstream junctions. This improves traffic flow outside the protected network by managing the queue propagation at the gated links and reducing the possibility of queue spill-back to upstream intersections. In addition, the results indicate that perimeter control with delay balancing has a similar performance as the case without queue or delay management being a suitable approach for flow distribution among the gated links. In the scenarios with perimeter control with either queue or delay balancing the gap between the ordered flow by the controller and the actual flow crossing the stop-line at the gated links reduced remarkably. |
| collection_details |
GBV_USEFLAG_U SYSFLAG_U GBV_ELV GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_32 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_90 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_150 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_224 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2004 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2006 GBV_ILN_2008 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2015 GBV_ILN_2020 GBV_ILN_2021 GBV_ILN_2025 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_2034 GBV_ILN_2038 GBV_ILN_2044 GBV_ILN_2048 GBV_ILN_2049 GBV_ILN_2050 GBV_ILN_2056 GBV_ILN_2059 GBV_ILN_2061 GBV_ILN_2064 GBV_ILN_2065 GBV_ILN_2068 GBV_ILN_2088 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2112 GBV_ILN_2113 GBV_ILN_2118 GBV_ILN_2122 GBV_ILN_2129 GBV_ILN_2143 GBV_ILN_2147 GBV_ILN_2148 GBV_ILN_2152 GBV_ILN_2153 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2336 GBV_ILN_2470 GBV_ILN_2507 GBV_ILN_2522 GBV_ILN_4035 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4046 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4242 GBV_ILN_4251 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4333 GBV_ILN_4334 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4393 |
| title_short |
Optimizing distribution of metered traffic flow in perimeter control: Queue and delay balancing approaches |
| remote_bool |
true |
| author2 |
Carlson, Rodrigo Castelan Knoop, Victor L. Papageorgiou, Markos |
| author2Str |
Carlson, Rodrigo Castelan Knoop, Victor L. Papageorgiou, Markos |
| ppnlink |
306716119 |
| mediatype_str_mv |
c |
| isOA_txt |
false |
| hochschulschrift_bool |
false |
| doi_str |
10.1016/j.conengprac.2021.104762 |
| up_date |
2024-07-06T18:56:13.115Z |
| _version_ |
1803857085718331392 |
| fullrecord_marcxml |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">ELV00572175X</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230524161126.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">230504s2021 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1016/j.conengprac.2021.104762</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)ELV00572175X</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(ELSEVIER)S0967-0661(21)00039-3</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rda</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">620</subfield><subfield code="q">DE-600</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">50.23</subfield><subfield code="2">bkl</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Keyvan-Ekbatani, Mehdi</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="0">(orcid)0000-0001-5482-3617</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Optimizing distribution of metered traffic flow in perimeter control: Queue and delay balancing approaches</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2021</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">zzz</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Perimeter traffic flow control based on the macroscopic or network fundamental diagram provides the opportunity of operating an urban traffic network at its capacity. Because perimeter control operates on the basis of restricting inflow via reduced green times at selected entry (gated) links, vehicles on those links may be subject to queuing and delay. The experienced delay or resulting queue lengths depend on the adopted policy for the distribution of the inflows and corresponding green times at the gated links. The chosen policy may have a significant impact on the traffic system under control. For example, managing queue lengths may reduce the interference with upstream traffic whereas the management of delays may improve users’ perception with respect to equity and fairness. In this paper, an approach has been proposed to distribute the gated flow based on the queue lengths or experienced delay at the gated signalized junctions. This is in contrast to standard practice that distributes inflows proportionally to the gated links’ saturation flows. Perimeter control is then evaluated in a microscopic simulator for a realistic traffic network and compared in three configurations against fixed-time: perimeter control without queue or delay management; perimeter control with relative queue balancing; and perimeter control with delay balancing. It has been found that managing the queues at the gated links not only improves the overall network performance but also reduces the possibility of queue propagation to the upstream junctions. This improves traffic flow outside the protected network by managing the queue propagation at the gated links and reducing the possibility of queue spill-back to upstream intersections. In addition, the results indicate that perimeter control with delay balancing has a similar performance as the case without queue or delay management being a suitable approach for flow distribution among the gated links. In the scenarios with perimeter control with either queue or delay balancing the gap between the ordered flow by the controller and the actual flow crossing the stop-line at the gated links reduced remarkably.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Urban traffic control</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Perimeter traffic flow control</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Macroscopic or network fundamental diagram</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Optimization</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Carlson, Rodrigo Castelan</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Knoop, Victor L.</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Papageorgiou, Markos</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="t">Control engineering practice</subfield><subfield code="d">Amsterdam [u.a.] : Elsevier Science, 1993</subfield><subfield code="g">110</subfield><subfield code="h">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)306716119</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)1501351-0</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-576)259271012</subfield><subfield code="x">1873-6939</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_U</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_U</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ELV</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_31</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_32</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_70</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_74</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_90</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_100</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_150</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_224</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_370</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_702</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2003</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2004</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2005</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2006</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2008</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2010</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2011</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2015</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2020</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2021</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2025</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2027</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2034</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2038</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2044</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2048</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2049</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2050</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2056</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2059</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2061</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2064</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2065</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2068</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2088</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2111</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2113</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2118</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2122</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2129</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2143</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2147</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2148</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2152</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2153</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2190</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2336</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2470</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2507</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2522</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4035</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4046</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4242</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4251</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4326</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4333</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4334</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4335</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4393</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="936" ind1="b" ind2="k"><subfield code="a">50.23</subfield><subfield code="j">Regelungstechnik</subfield><subfield code="j">Steuerungstechnik</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">110</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
| score |
7.400321 |