Verification of the Safe Driver Assisted Merge Protocol

1. Verification of the Safe Driver Assisted Merge Protocol Brian Choi, Emmanuel Peters, Shou-pon Lin E6778 March 7, 2012

2. Outline • Brief summary of project  • Updated timeline • Completed tasks • Implemented updated merge protocol in simulator with velocity matching • Results of baseline • Observations which justifies development of extended protocol • Developed projection-based proactive merge protocol • Future tasks • Progress evaluation

3. Project Goals • Test the safe driver assisted merge protocol in a software environment to measure improvements in average vehicle throughput and average merge speed as a function of participation rate. • Validate the protocol by also testing against the failures initially presented last year. • Expand the safe driver assisted merge protocol by introducing proactive merging techniques

4. Updated Timeline • Incorporate Protocol into Model (2/8-3/6) • Establish programmable parameters from SDAM protocol (2/8-2/15) • Reproduce protocol in software model (2/15-2/25) • Incorporate failure modes into model (2/25-3/7) • Run Simulations (3/7-4/4) • Introduce variability of traffic simulation (3/7-3/14) • Evaluate performance (3/14-4/4) • Code Debugging (3/14-4/4) • Summarize Results (4/4-4/18) • Report (4/4-4/11) • Presentation (4/11-4/18) • Incorporate Protocol into Model (2/8-3/6) • Refine merge protocol for utilization in traffic simulator (2/8-2/15) • Projection based proactive merging protocol (2/15-2/25) • Add protocols to traffic simulator (2/25-3/7) • Run Simulations (3/7-4/4) • Run Baseline Simulations (3/7-3/14) • Run Updated Protocol Simulations (3/14-4/4) • Compare Results (3/28-4/4) • Code Debugging (3/14-4/4) • Summarize Results (4/4-4/18) • Report (4/4-4/11) • Presentation (4/11-4/18)

5. Basic Merge Protocol • Car on highway breaks suddenly to create room for merging car • Other cars are forced to break suddenly also

6. Updated Merging Protocol • Instead of initiate merging protocol whenever a vehicle comes up of the ramp, we restrict that when initiating of merging protocol, the merging car should travel within a certain range of neighboring vehicle • Limit the amount of deceleration of back car • The merging car cannot travel at a speed that is too low

7. Baseline Results

8. Baseline Results

9. Performance in terms of delay

10. Average Throughput

11. The Need of Extended Protocol • Finding the participating vehicles by projecting the future positions of vehicles on the main road • Match the speed from the start of the ramp, instead of passively traveling on the ramp until the speeds of involved vehicles are matched • Creating the gap before the merging point is reached

12. IDM Cruise Control Wait Incr. Safety Spacing Car on ramp NOT participating in merge Wait Timer expires Car leaves ramp No neighbors found Abort Merge Protocol Poll Road Velocity, Positions of neighbors No suitable neighbors found in X trials No suitable neighbors. No. of Trials <X Neighbors found Project Positions Unexpected event: Sudden breaking, etc. Select Neighbors for Merge Accelerate Merge Maneuver IDM Cruise Control Merge Completed Achieve Target Velocity Projection based proactive merging protocol

13. Future Tasks • Implement Projection-based proactive merging protocol in the simulator • Introduce failure model in the simulator • Simulations with the extended protocol • Results analysis

14. Progress Evaluation