On the Controversy Around Daganzo’s Requiem for and Aw–Rascle’s Resurrection of Second-Order Traffic Flow Models

Chapter
Part of the Lecture Notes in Mathematics book series (LNM, volume 2062)

Abstract

Daganzo’s criticisms of second-order fluid approximations of traffic flow [C. Daganzo, Transp. Res. B 29, 277–286 (1995)] and Aw and Rascle’s proposal how to overcome them [A. Aw and M. Rascle, SIAM J. Appl. Math. 60, 916–938 (2000)] have stimulated an intensive scientific activity in the field of traffic modeling. Here, we will revisit their arguments and the interpretations behind them. We will start by analyzing the linear stability of traffic models, which is a widely established approach to study the ability of traffic models to describe emergent traffic jams. Besides deriving a collection of useful formulas for stability analyses, the main attention is put on the characteristic speeds, which are related to the group velocities of the linearized model equations. Most macroscopic traffic models with a dynamic velocity equation appear to predict two characteristic speeds, one of which is faster than the average velocity. This has been claimed to constitute a theoretical inconsistency. We will carefully discuss arguments for and against this view. In particular, we will shed some new light on the problem by comparing Payne’s macroscopic traffic model with the Aw–Rascle model and macroscopic with microscopic traffic models.

Keywords

Group Velocity Traffic Flow Vehicle Speed Traffic Model Optimal Velocity 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Notes

Acknowledgements

Author contributions: DH performed the analytical calculations and proposed the initial conditions for the simulation presented in Fig. 1. AJ generated the computational results and prepared the figure.

Acknowledgment: DH would like to thank for the inspiring discussions with the participants of the Workshop on “Multiscale Problems and Models in Traffic Flow” organized by Michel Rascle and Christian Schmeiser at the Wolfgang Pauli Institute in Vienna from May 5–9, 2008, with partial support by the CNRS.

References

  1. 1.
    D. Chowdhury, L. Santen, A. Schadschneider, Statistical physics of vehicular traffic and some related systems. Phys. Rep. 329, 199 (2000)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    D. Helbing, Traffic and related self-driven many-particle systems. Rev. Mod. Phys. 73, 1067–1141 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    T. Nagatani, The physics of traffic jams. Rep. Prog. Phys. 65, 1331–1386 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    K. Nagel, Multi-Agent Transportation Simulations, see http://www2.tu-berlin.de/fb10/ISS/FG4/archive/sim-archive/publications/book/
  5. 5.
    M. Schönhof, D. Helbing, Empirical features of congested traffic state and their implications for traffic modeling. Transp. Sci. 41, 135–166 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Y. Sugiyama, M. Fukui, M. Kikuchi, K. Hasebe, A. Nakayama, K. Nishinari, S.-i. Tadaki, S. Yukawa, Traffic jams without bottlenecks—experimental evidence for the physical mechanism of the formation of a jam. New J. Phys. 10, 033001 (2008)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    R. Herman, E.W. Montroll, R.B. Potts, R.W. Rothery, Traffic dynamics: Analysis of stability in car following. Oper. Res. 7, 86–106 (1959)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    R.D. Kühne, M.B. Rödiger, Macroscopic simulation model for freeway traffic with jams and stop-start waves, in Proceedings of the 1991 Winter Simulation Conference, ed. by B.L. Nelson, W.D. Kelton, G.M. Clark (Society for Computer Simulation International, Phoenix, 1991), pp. 762–770CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    M. Bando, K. Hasebe, A. Nakayama, A. Shibata, Y. Sugiyama, Dynamical model of traffic congestion and numerical simulation. Phys. Rev. E 51, 1035–1042 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    D. Helbing, Derivation of non-local macroscopic traffic equations and consistent traffic pressures from microscopic car-following models. Eur. Phys. J. B 69, 539–548 (2009)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    C.F. Daganzo, Requiem for second-order fluid approximations of traffic flow. Transp. Res. B 29, 277–286 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    M. Lighthill, G. Whitham, On kinematic waves: II. A theory of traffic on long crowded roads. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. A 229, 317–345 (1955)MathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    P.I. Richards, Shock waves on the highway. Oper. Res. 4, 42–51 (1956)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    G.B. Whitham, Linear and Nonlinear Waves (Wiley, New York, 1974)MATHGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    H.J. Payne, Models of freeway traffic and control, in Mathematical Models of Public Systems, vol. 1, ed. by G.A. Bekey (Simulation Council, La Jolla, 1971), pp. 51–61Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    H.J. Payne, A critical review of a macroscopic freeway model, in Research Directions in Computer Control of Urban Traffic Systems, ed. by W.S. Levine, E. Lieberman, J.J. Fearnsides (American Society of Civil Engineers, New York, 1979), pp. 251–265Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    I. Prigogine, R. Herman, Kinetic Theory of Vehicular Traffic (Elsevier, New York, 1971)MATHGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    M. Treiber, A. Hennecke, D. Helbing, Derivation, properties, and simulation of a gas-kinetic-based, non-local traffic model. Phys. Rev. E 59, 239–253 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    V. Shvetsov, D. Helbing, Macroscopic dynamics of multi-lane traffic. Phys. Rev. E 59, 6328–6339 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    D. Helbing, M. Treiber, Numerical simulation of macroscopic traffic equations. Comput. Sci. Eng. 1(5), 89–99 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    C.K.J. Wagner, Verkehrsflußmodelle unter Berücksichtigung eines internen Freiheitsgrades. Ph.D. Thesis, TU Munich, 1997Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    S.P. Hoogendoorn, P.H.L. Bovy, Continuum modeling of multiclass traffic flow. Transp. Res. B 34(2), 123–146 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    S.L. Paveri-Fontana, On Boltzmann-like treatments for traffic flow. A critical review of the basic model and an alternative proposal for dilute traffic analysis. Transp. Res. 9, 225–235 (1975)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    L.C. Evans, Partial Differential Equations (American Mathematical Society, Providence, 1998)MATHGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    S.F. Farlow, Partial Differential Equations for Scientists and Engineers (Dover, New York, 1993)MATHGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    R.J. LeVeque, Numerical Methods for Conservation Laws (Birkhäuser, Basel, 1992)MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    A. Aw, M. Rascle, Resurrection of “second order” models of traffic flow. SIAM J. Appl. Math. 60(3), 916–938 (2000)MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    A. Klar, R. Wegener, Kinetic derivation of macroscopic anticipation models for vehicular traffic. SIAM J. Appl. Math. 60(5), 1749–1766 (2000)MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    J.M. Greenberg, Extensions and amplifications of a traffic model of Aw and Rascle. SIAM J. Appl. Math. 62(3), 729–745 (2001)MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    H.M. Zhang, A non-equilibrium traffic model devoid of gas-like behavior. Transp. Res. B 36, 275–290 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    P. Goatin, The Aw-Rascle vehicular traffic flow model with phase transitions. Math. Comput. Model. 44, 287–303 (2006)MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    M. Garavello, B. Piccoli, Traffic flow on a road network using the Aw-Rascle model. Comm. Partial Differ. Equat. 31, 243–275 (2006)MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    F. Siebel, W. Mauser, Synchronized flow and wide moving jams from balanced vehicular traffic. Phys. Rev. E 73, 066108 (2006)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Z.-H. Ou, S.-Q. Dai, P. Zhang, L.-Y. Dong, Nonlinear analysis in the Aw-Rascle anticipation model of traffic flow. SIAM J. Appl. Math. 67(3), 605–618 (2007)MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    J.-P. Lebacque, S. Mammar, H. Haj-Salem, The Aw-Rascle and Zhang’s model: Vacuum problems, existence and regularity of the solutions of the Riemann problem. Transp. Res. B 41, 710–721 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    F. Berthelin, P. Degond, M. Delitala, M. Rascle, A model for the formation and evolution of traffic jams. Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal. 187, 185–220 (2008)MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    J. Keizer, Statistical Thermodynamics of Nonequilibrium Processes (Springer, New York, 1987)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    W.F. Phillips, A kinetic model for traffic flow with continuum implications. Transp. Plan. Tech. 5, 131–138 (1979)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    B.S. Kerner, P. Konhäuser, Cluster effect in initially homogeneous traffic flow. Phys. Rev. E 48(4), R2335–R2338 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    H.Y. Lee, H.-W. Lee, D. Kim, Origin of synchronized traffic flow on highways and its dynamic phase transitions. Phys. Rev. Lett. 81, 1130–1133 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    M. Treiber, A. Hennecke, D. Helbing, Congested traffic states in empirical observations and microscopic simulations. Phys. Rev. E 62, 1805–1824 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    A. Hood, Characteristics, in Encyklopedia of Nonlinear Science, ed. by A. Scott (Routledge, New York, 2005)Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    D. Helbing, Derivation and empirical validation of a refined traffic flow model. Phys. A 233, 253–282 (1996). See also http://arxiv.org/abs/cond-mat/9805136

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.ETH Zurich, UNO D11Universitätstr. 41ZurichSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations