HONEST-CAV: Hierarchical Optimization of Network Signals and Trajectories for Connected and Automated Vehicles with Multi-Agent Reinforcement Learning
Organizations: College of Engineering, Center for Environmental Research and Technology, University of California at Riverside, Riverside, CA, 92507. · InfoTech Labs, Toyota Motor North America, Mountain View, CA, 94043.
Abstract
This study presents a hierarchical, network-level traffic flow control framework for mixed traffic consisting of Human-driven Vehicles (HVs), Connected and Automated Vehicles (CAVs). The framework jointly optimizes vehicle-level eco-driving behaviors and intersection-level traffic signal control to enhance overall network efficiency and decrease energy consumption. A decentralized Multi-Agent Reinforcement Learning (MARL) approach by Value Decomposition Network (VDN) manages cycle-based traffic signal control (TSC) at intersections, while an innovative Signal Phase and Timing (SPaT) prediction method integrates a Machine Learning-based Trajectory Planning Algorithm (MLTPA) to guide CAVs in executing Eco-Approach and Departure (EAD) maneuvers. The framework is evaluated across varying CAV proportions and powertrain types to assess its effects on mobility and energy performance. Experimental results conducted in a 4*4 real-world network demonstrate that the MARL-based TSC method outperforms the baseline model (i.e., Webster method) in speed, fuel consumption, and idling time. In addition, with MLTPA, HONEST-CAV benefits the traffic system further in energy consumption and idling time. With a 60% CAV proportion, vehicle average speed, fuel consumption, and idling time can be improved/saved by 7.67%, 10.23%, and 45.83% compared with the baseline. Furthermore, discussions on CAV proportions and powertrain types are conducted to quantify the performance of the proposed method with the impact of automation and electrification.
Figures & tables
| Metric | Baseline | IRL TSC + Krauss | MARL TSC + Krauss | MARL TSC + MLTPA |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Avg. Energy (L/100 km) | 11.71 | 11.32 (-3.33%) | 10.99 (-6.13%) | 10.51 (-10.23%) |
| Avg. Idling Time (s/veh) | 49.79 | 47.05 (-5.51%) | 36.32 (-27.05%) | 26.97 (-45.83%) |
| Avg. Speed (m/s) | 8.21 | 8.51(+3.52%) | 8.72 (+6.25%) | 8.84 (+7.67%) |
| Metric | 0.1-0.3 | 0.3-0.5 | 0.5-0.7 | 0.7-0.9 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Avg. Energy (L/100 km) | 10.79 (-7.88%) | 10.59 (-9.57%) | 10.41 (-11.11%) | 10.23 (-12.62%) |
| Avg. Idling Time (s/veh) | 32.06 (-35.60%) | 28.17 (-43.42%) | 24.61 (-50.56%) | 21.18 (-57.47%) |
| Avg. Speed (m/s) | 8.80 (+7.16%) | 8.86 (+7.93%) | 8.92 (+8.62%) | 8.96 (+9.15%) |
| Metric | Baseline (EV-based) | 0.1-0.3 | 0.3-0.5 | 0.5-0.7 | 0.7-0.9 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Avg. Energy (L/100 km) | 1.08 | 1.06 (-1.88%) | 1.04 (-3.43%) | 1.03 (-4.74%) | 1.01 (-6.20%) |
| Avg. Idling Time (s/veh) | 49.80 | 34.37 (-30.98%) | 30.69 (-38.38%) | 28.48 (-42.82%) | 25.63 (-48.53%) |
| Avg. Speed (m/s) | 8.21 | 8.74 (+6.41%) | 8.81 (+7.35%) | 8.85 (+7.78%) | 8.90 (+8.45%) |
Intelligent Transportation Systems
Intelligent Transportation Systems apply sensing, communication, AI, and optimization to make transport networks safer and more efficient.
See all 290 papers