Data_Sheet_1_Deep Learning Based Proactive Multi-Objective Eco-Routing Strategies for Connected and Automated Vehicles.pdf
This study exploited the advancements in information and communication technology (ICT), connected and automated vehicles (CAVs), and sensing to develop proactive multi-objective eco-routing strategies for travel time and Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions reduction on urban road networks. For a robust application, several GHG costing approaches were examined. The predictive models for link level traffic and emission states were developed using the long short-term memory (LSTM) deep network with exogenous predictors. It was found that proactive routing strategies outperformed the reactive strategies regardless of the routing objective. Whether reactive or proactive, the multi-objective routing, with travel time and GHG minimization, outperformed the single objective routing strategies. Using a proactive multi-objective (travel time and GHG) routing strategy, we observed a reduction in average travel time (17%), average vehicle kilometer traveled (22%), total GHG (18%), and total nitrogen oxide (20%) when compared with the reactive single-objective (travel time).
History
References
- https://doi.org//10.1007/978-3-319-94463-0
- https://doi.org//10.1109/ISC2.2018.8656941
- https://doi.org//10.1109/ISC246665.2019.9071744
- https://doi.org//10.1155/2020/4362493
- https://doi.org//10.1016/j.trd.2020.102593
- https://doi.org//10.1109/IC3.2019.8844902
- https://doi.org//10.1016/j.enpol.2019.03.056
- https://doi.org//10.1023/A:1012883811652
- https://doi.org//10.1016/j.trpro.2019.09.082
- https://doi.org//10.1016/j.envpol.2018.04.020
- https://doi.org//10.1016/j.trd.2020.102513
- https://doi.org//10.1109/ITSC.2016.7795686
- https://doi.org//10.5220/0005778900310038
- https://doi.org//10.1016/j.trc.2019.07.003
- https://doi.org//10.3390/s18041212
- https://doi.org//10.1007/s13218-015-0381-0
- https://doi.org//10.4271/912815
- https://doi.org//10.1155/2016/3727865
- https://doi.org//10.1186/1687-1499-2014-85
- https://doi.org//10.1016/j.trb.2016.08.005
- https://doi.org//10.1016/j.trd.2016.08.013
- https://doi.org//10.1016/j.trc.2015.03.014
- https://doi.org//10.1109/ITSC.2018.8569731
- https://doi.org//10.1109/TVT.2013.2260422
- https://doi.org//10.1016/j.energy.2011.01.032
- https://doi.org//10.4236/ojs.2017.74038
- https://doi.org//10.1260/2046-0430.1.3.259
- https://doi.org//10.3390/s19040861
- https://doi.org//10.1080/09332480.2014.914768
- https://doi.org//10.1103/PhysRevE.62.1805
- https://doi.org//10.1016/j.trd.2019.06.008
- https://doi.org//10.3390/su8090923
- https://doi.org//10.1016/j.trc.2014.01.005
- https://doi.org//10.1016/j.trc.2019.04.017
- https://doi.org//10.1080/15472450600981041
- https://doi.org//10.1111/mice.12221
- https://doi.org//10.3182/20090902-3-US-2007.0018
- https://doi.org//10.1016/S0925-2312(01)00702-0
- https://doi.org//10.1109/ITSC.2019.8917509
- https://doi.org//10.1016/S0968-090X(03)00026-3
- https://doi.org//10.1109/GeoInformatics.2011.5980759
CC BY 4.0