Merging behaviour: Empirical comparison between two sites and new theory development

Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies

Volumn 36, Issue , 2013, Pages 530-546

  Marczak, Florian ^a   Daamen, Winnie ^b   Buisson, Christine ^a  

^a UNIVERSITÉ DE LYON   (France)

^b DELFT UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Gap acceptance theory assessment; Merging behaviour; Microscopic empirical data

Indexed keywords

HIGHWAY TRAFFIC CONTROL; LOGISTIC REGRESSION;

ACCELERATION LANE; COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS; EMPIRICAL - COMPARISONS; EMPIRICAL DATA; GAP ACCEPTANCE THEORIES; LOGISTIC REGRESSION MODELING; TRAFFIC COMPOSITIONS; TRAFFIC CONDITIONS;

MERGING;

COMPARATIVE STUDY; CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK; DATA SET; EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS; MOTORWAY; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; TRAJECTORY; TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM;

FRANCE; NETHERLANDS;

EID: 84887139050     PISSN: 0968090X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.trc.2013.07.007     Document Type: Article

References (43)

1. Ahmed, K.I., 1999. Modeling Drivers' Acceleration and Lane Changing Behavior. PhD Dissertation, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, MIT.
2. Fundamentals of Traffic Simulation 2010, vol. 145. Springer, New York.
3. Barceló J., Casas J. Dynamic network simulation with AIMSUN. Simulation Approaches in Transportation Analysis: Recent Advances and Challenges 2005, 57-98. Kluwer, Amsterdam. R. Kitamura, M. Kuwahara (Eds.).
4. Bar-Gera H., Ahn S. Empirical macroscopic evaluation of freeway merge-ratios. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies 2010, 18(4):457-470.
5. Bhouri N., Haj-Salem H., Kauppila J. Isolated versus coordinated ramp metering: field evaluation results of travel time reliability and traffic impact. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies 2013, 28:155-167.
6. Bloomberg L., Dale J. A comparison of the VISSIM and CORSIM traffic simulation models 2000, Institute of Transportation Engineers Annual Meeting.
7. Chevallier E., Leclercq L. A macroscopic theory for unsignalized intersections. Transportation Research Part B: Methodological 2007, 41(10):1139-1150.
8. Choudhury C.F., Toledo T., Ben-Akiva M., Rao A., Lee G. Cooperative Lane changing and Forced Merging Model: NGSIM Final Report 2006, Federal Highway Administration, Washington.
9. Choudhury, C.F., Ben-Akiva, M., Toledo, T., Lee, G., Rao, A., 2007. Modeling cooperative lane changing and forced merging behavior. In: The 86th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington.
10. Chung K., Rudjanakanoknad J., Cassidy M.J. Relation between traffic density and capacity drop at three freeway bottlenecks. Transportation Research Part B: Methodological 2007, 41(1):82-95.
11. Daamen W., Loot M.E.J., Hoogendoorn S.P. Empirical analysis of merging behavior at freeway on-ramp. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board 2010, 2188:108-118.
12. Daganzo C.F. The cell transmission model, Part II: network traffic. Transportation Research Part B: Methodological 1995, 29(2):79-93.
13. Elefteriadou L., Roess R.P., McShane W.R. The probabilistic nature of 42 breakdowns at freeway-merge junctions. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board 1995, 1484:80-89.
14. Elefteriadou, L., Hall, F.L., Brilon, W., Roess, R.P., Romana, M.G., 2006. Revisiting the definition and measurement of capacity. In: Proceedings of the 5th International Symposium on Highway Capacity and Quality of Service, Yokohama, Japan.
15. Govaert G. Data Analysis 2009, ISTE Ltd. and John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 318p.
16. Hall F.L., Agyemang-Duah K. Freeway capacity drop and the definition of capacity. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board 1991, 1320:91-98.
17. Hidas P. Modelling lane changing and merging in microscopic traffic simulation. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies 2002, 10(5):351-371.
18. Hidas, P., 2005a. Modelling individual behaviour in microsimulation models. Australian Transport Research Forum 2005.
19. Hidas P. Modelling vehicle interactions in microscopic simulation of merging and weaving. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies 2005, 13(1):37-62.
20. Hoogendoorn, S.P., Van Zuylen, H.J., Schreuder, M., Gorte, B., Vosselman, G., 2003. Traffic data collection from aerial imagery. In: The 82nd Annual meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington.
21. Kerner B.S., Rehborn H. Experimental properties of phase transitions in traffic flow. Physical Review Letters 1997, 79(20):4030-4033.
22. Kita H. Effects of merging lane length on the merging behavior at expressway on-ramps. Proceedings of 12th International Symposium on Transportation and Traffic Theory 1993, 37-51. Elsevier. C.F. Daganzo (Ed.).
23. Kita H., Fukuyama K. A merging-giveaway behavior model considering interactions at expressway on-ramps. Proceedings of 14th International Symposium on Transportation and Traffic Theory 1999, 173-187. Elsevier. A. Ceder (Ed.).
24. Kita H., Keishi T. A game theoretical analysis of merging-giveaway interaction: a joint estimation model. Proceedings of the 15th International Symposium on Transportation and Traffic Theory 2002, 503-518. Pergamon. M.A.P. Taylor (Ed.).
25. Knoppers, P., van Lint, H., Hoogendoorn, S.P., 2012. Automatic stabilization of aerial traffic images. In: The 91st Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington.
26. Kondyli, A., Elefteriadou, L., 2010. Driver behavior at freeway-ramp merging areas based on instrumented vehicle observations. In: The 89th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington.
27. Kondyli A., Elefteriadou L. Modeling driver behavior at freeway-ramp merges. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board 2011, 2249:29-37.
28. Laval J.A. Linking synchronized flow and kinematic wave theory. Traffic and Granular Flow '05 2005, 521-526. Springer. A. Schadschneider, R. Poschel, R. Kuhne, M. Schreckenberg, D.E. Wolf (Eds.).
29. Lee, G., 2006. Modeling Gap Acceptance in Freeway Merges. MSc Thesis, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, MIT.
30. Liu H.X., Wuping X., Adams M.A., Ban J.X. A game theoretical approach for modeling merging and yielding behaviour at freeway on-ramp sections. Proceedings of 17th International Symposium on Transportation and Traffic Theory 2007, 691-710. Elsevier. R.E. Allsop, M.G.H. Bell, B.G. Heydecker (Eds.).
31. Loot, M., 2009. Empirical Analysis of Merging Behaviour, a Microscopic Approach to Establish a New Theory. MSc Thesis, Delft University of Technology.
32. Michaels R.M., Fazio J. Driver behavior model of merging. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board 1989, 1213:4-10.
33. MOCoPo, 2012. Measuring and Modelling Traffic Congestion and Pollution. (accessed 23.07.12). http://mocopo.ifsttar.fr/.
34. Oh, S., Yeo, H., 2012. Microscopic analysis on the causal factors of capacity drop in highway merging sections. In: The 91st Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington.
35. PTV, 2008. VISSIM 5.10 User Manual. Karlsruhe, Germany.
36. Rao, A., 2006. Modeling Anticipatory Driving Behavior. MSc Thesis, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, MIT.
37. Sarvi M., Kuwahara M. Microsimulation of freeway ramp merging processes under congested traffic conditions. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems 2007, 8(3):470-479.
38. Sarvi M., Avishai C., Kuwahara M. Modeling of freeway ramp merging process observed during traffic congestion. Proceedings of the 15th International Symposium on Transportation and Traffic Theory 2002, 483-502. Pergamon. M.A.P. Taylor (Ed.).
39. Wang J., Liu R., Montgomery F. A simulation model for motorway merging behavior. Proceedings of the 16th International Symposium on Transportation and Traffic Theory 2005, 281-301. Elsevier. H.S. Mahmassani (Ed.).
40. Wu J., McDonald M., Chatterjee K. A detailed evaluation of ramp metering impacts on driver behaviour. Transportation Research Part F: Psychology and Behaviour 2007, 10(1):61-75.
41. Xiao H., Ambadipudi R., Hourdakis J., Michalopoulos P. Methodology for Selecting Microscopic Simulators: Comparative Evaluation of AIMSUN and VISSIM 2005, Intelligent Transportation Systems Institute, Center for Transportation Studies, University of Minnesota, USA.
42. Yang Q., Koutsopoulos H.N. A microscopic traffic simulator for evaluation of dynamic traffic management systems. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies 1996, 4(3):113-129.
43. Yi, H., Mulinazzi, T.E., 2007. Urban freeway on-ramp invasive influences on 3 mainline operations. In: The 86th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington.