In this contribution, we compare Kerner's three-phase traffic theory with the phase diagram approach for traffic models with a fundamental diagram.
Having information of communication dynamics of applications (e.g. repetitiveness, computing and communication phases, traffic pattern and bandwidth, etc).
In this paper, we propose a new cellular automaton model based on the well known three-phase traffic theory.
Conversely, we demonstrate that models created to reproduce three-phase traffic theory create similar spatiotemporal traffic states and associated phase diagrams, no matter whether the parameters imply a fundamental diagram in equilibrium or non-unique flow-density relationships.
We discuss the inconsistent use of the term "traffic phase" and show that patterns demanded by three-phase traffic theory can be reproduced with simple two-phase models, if the model parameters are suitably specified and factors characteristic for real traffic flows are considered, such as effects of noise or heterogeneity or the actual freeway design (e.g. combinations of off- and on-ramps).
In the City, meanwhile, the impatient, assertive people who work for the financial industry won't wait long for the red man to turn green, which means they don't take well to the elaborate multi-phase traffic lights, at which bikes, cars and pedestrians must patiently wait their turn.
In synchronized flow phase, traffic density is increased.
In this paper, we design three traffic flow scenarios according to Kerner's three-phase traffic model.
Considering the practice of the three-phase traffic model, the speed has greater impact on traffic flow phase than the density under the same condition.
This method divides vehicular speed and density into three categories as defined in Kerner's three-phase traffic model.
