Enhancing Intelligent Traffic Management in 5G Networks Using
Proto-goal Evaluator: A Reinforcement Learning Approach for
Congestion Control and QoS Optimization
Panduranga Ravi Teja
Department of Electronincs and Communications Warangal,India
prt.ece@kitsw.ac.in
Abstract— Intelligent Traffic Management (ITM) plays a
crucial role in modern communication networks, particularly
in the context of 5G and beyond. The dynamic and diverse
nature of traffic necessitates efficient strategies for congestion
control, QoS optimization, and traffic prioritization. This
paper explores the application of the Proto-goal Evaluator
(PGE), a framework for goal-directed exploration in
reinforcement learning, to enhance ITM in 5G networks. By
defining a set of proto-goals related to traffic management,
the PGE refines and selects a subset of goals that are both
feasible and desirable. The binary filtering stage of the PGE
prunes implausible goals, while the weighting stage assigns
desirability scores to the remaining goals. This process
ensures that the selected goals are controllable, reachable,
and relevant to ITM objectives. The proposed framework
offers a systematic approach to adaptively explore and
optimize traffic management strategies, enabling the network
to dynamically respond to changing traffic conditions.
Through simulations and evaluations in various 5G scenarios,
the effectiveness of the framework is demonstrated in
achieving efficient congestion control, improved QoS, and
effective traffic prioritization. The results highlight the
potential of the PGE framework as a valuable tool for
intelligent traffic management in 5G networks, paving the
way for enhanced network performance, user experience,
and resource utilization.
Index Terms— Intelligent Traffic Management, 5G Networks,
Proto-goal Evaluator, Goal-directed Exploration, Reinforce-
ment Learning, Congestion Control, Quality of Service, Traffic
Prioritization, Dynamic Adaptation, Feasibility, Desirability,
Controllability, Reachability, Relevant Goals, Simulation, Eval-
uations, Resource Utilization..
I. INTRODUCTION
Modern communication networks, especially those that
support 5G and beyond, heavily rely on intelligent traffic
management (ITM). Effective solutions for traffic priori-
tization, Quality of Service (QoS) optimization, and con-
gestion control are increasingly important as the volume
and complexity of traffic continue to rise. The dynamic
and diversified character of contemporary traffic patterns
can make it difficult for traditional approaches to traffic
management to function. This research investigates the
use of the Proto-goal Evaluator (PGE), a framework for
goal-directed exploration in reinforcement learning, to
enhance ITM in 5G networks in order to overcome these
issues.
1
For effective traffic management, the PGE framework
uses reinforcement learning and goal-directed exploration
to refine and choose a subset of goals that are both
realistic and desirable. The PGE offers a methodical way to
investigate and improve traffic management solutions by
defining a set of proto-goals linked to traffic management.
By constantly altering congestion control techniques, opti-
mizing QoS parameters, and successfully prioritizing traf-
fic flows, the framework enables the network to respond
adaptively to changing traffic conditions.
The binary filtering and weighting phases make up
the PGE framework. Impossible goals are pruned in the
binary filtering stage according to their viability. This step
makes sure that only objectives that can be managed and
achieved within the constraints of the network are taken
into account. In the weighting stage, the remaining goals
are given desirability scores based on how closely they
relate to ITM goals. This procedure makes sure that the
chosen objectives not only match the capabilities of the
network but also give the intended effects of effective
traffic management priority.
The effectiveness of the PGE framework in delivering
effective congestion control, enhanced QoS, and traffic
prioritization is illustrated through simulations and tests
in several 5G scenarios. The outcomes demonstrate the
PGE framework’s potential as a useful tool for intelligent
traffic management in 5G networks. The PGE framework
aids in improving network performance, user experience,
and resource consumption by enabling the network to
dynamically adapt and optimize its traffic management
tactics.
In conclusion, this study introduces the Proto-goal
Evaluator (PGE), a revolutionary framework for intelligent
traffic management in 5G networks. The PGE framework
provides a systematic method to adaptively explore and
optimize traffic management techniques by fusing re-
inforcement learning and goal-directed exploration. The
evaluations and simulation results demonstrated the PGE
framework’s efficiency in providing enhanced QoS, effi-
cient traffic prioritization, and efficient congestion control.
The PGE framework presents a viable path for further re-
search and implementation in the field of intelligent traffic
management due to its potential to improve network
performance, user experience, and resource utilization in
5G networks.
II. LITERATURE SURVEY
In the field of intelligent traffic management and the
application of advanced technologies in 5G networks,
several studies have been conducted to address various
challenges and optimize system performance. This litera-
ture review summarizes key research works related to en-
ergy management, forecasting models, distributed IoT for
autonomous vehicles, intelligent traffic information fusion
networks, reliable routing, QoS-aware forwarding, energy-
neutral and QoS-aware protocols, controller design using
deep reinforcement learning, and network management
in future IIoT networks.
One research work by [1] proposes a heuristic planning
energy management controller based on a Dyna agent
of reinforcement learning approach for real-time fuel
saving optimization of a plug-in hybrid electric vehicle
(PHEV). In [2], the Taguchi method is used to obtain the
optimized configuration of an exponential smoothing and
extreme learning machine forecasting model. [3] focuses
on distributed real-time IoT for autonomous vehicles and
presents a consensus-based constant step-size gradient
descent algorithm to achieve near-optimal solutions.
The construction of modern intelligent traffic infor-
mation fusion networks and cloud-based control sys-
tems is explored in [4]. The paper discusses challenges
such as complex object types, large data collection, high
transmission and calculation demands, and weak real-
time scheduling and control abilities. In [5], the authors
present the Q-learning reliable routing approach, where
an agent adjusts the weights of a graph-routing algorithm.
[6] proposes an intelligent QoS-aware forwarding strategy
for industrial applications using a single path minimum
cost forwarding scheme and a K-path partition algorithm.
The energy-neutral and QoS-aware protocol (EQP) is
introduced in [7], which incorporates duty cycling and
network scheduling to solve energy-related challenges. [8]
presents an approach that utilizes deep reinforcement
learning methods for controller design in electrical drives.
[9] proposes a novel deep reinforcement learning scheme
for federated and dynamic network management and
resource allocation in future IIoT networks.
Moreover, the literature indicates that privacy security
in IIoT routing processes is often overlooked. [11] high-
lights the need to consider privacy security aspects in IIoT
routing protocols. [12] proposes the QoSPR protocol, a
quality of service and data privacy-aware routing protocol
for 5G-IIoT. [13] focuses on radio resource allocation and
transmit beamforming to improve resource utilization and
IIoT users’ satisfaction. [14] employs perturbation theory
to study the quasi-optimization of UAV’s location, height,
beamwidth, and resource allocation.
In the context of UAVs, [15] presents an iterative op-
timization method to minimize the average overall de-
coding error by determining the optimal UAV’s height
2
and location, antenna beamwidth, and variable power and
blocklength allocated to each robot. [16] addresses energy
cost concerns by designing a joint computing and caching
framework using the deep deterministic policy gradi-
ent algorithm. Additionally, [18] proposes a decentralized
electric vehicle charging framework for optimizing the
lifetime of distribution transformers, taking into account
EV owners’ dissatisfactions. [19] introduces a multitask
learning-based algorithm for network traffic prediction,
considering spatial and temporal features.
These existing research works in intelligent traffic man-
agement and 5G networks provide valuable insights into
various aspects such as energy management, forecast-
ing, routing, QoS optimization, UAV communication, and
network resource allocation. However, there remains a
need for further exploration and investigation to address
the evolving challenges and enhance the performance of
intelligent traffic management systems in the context of
5G and beyond.
III. SYSTEM MODEL
To provide a system model for the application of the
Proto-goal Evaluator (PGE) framework in Intelligent Traffic
Management (ITM) within a 5G network, we can consider
the following components:
Traffic Monitoring:
Sensor Nodes: These nodes are deployed throughout
the network to collect real-time traffic data, including
traffic volume, flow characteristics, and QoS metrics. Data
Aggregator: Gathers and aggregates the data from sensor
nodes, providing a comprehensive view of the network
traffic. Proto-goal Definition:
Human Designer: Specifies a set of proto-goals related
to ITM, such as congestion control, QoS optimization,
and traffic prioritization. Proto-goal Repository: Stores the
defined proto-goals, forming a broader space of potential
objectives. Proto-goal Evaluator (PGE):
Binary Filtering Stage: Evaluates the plausibility of each
proto-goal based on the network’s capabilities and con-
straints, discarding goals that violate rules or physical
limitations. Weighting Stage: Assigns desirability scores or
weights to the remaining proto-goals, considering factors
such as relevance, impact on QoS, and importance for
traffic management. Goal Refinement:
Goal Set G: The PGE outputs a refined set of goals
G, representing a narrower and more meaningful subset
of objectives for ITM. Distribution P(G): Represents the
relative desirability or priority of each goal in G. Traffic
Management Agent:
Reinforcement Learning Agent: Utilizes the refined set
of goals G as the target objectives for exploration and
decision-making. State Representation: Encodes the cur-
rent network state, including traffic conditions, resource
availability, and QoS metrics. Action Selection: Chooses
actions to be taken for traffic management based on
the learned policy and the defined goals in G. Reward
Mechanism: Provides feedback to the agent based on the
achievement of the goals, incentivizing effective traffic
management. Network Control:
Traffic Control Mechanisms: Include congestion control
algorithms, QoS provisioning strategies, and traffic priori-
tization mechanisms that implement the decisions made
by the traffic management agent. Resource Allocation:
Optimizes the allocation of network resources, such as
bandwidth, power, and spectrum, based on the defined
goals and traffic conditions.
Node 1 Node 3
Node 2 Node 4
Fig. 1. System Model
Evaluation and Adaptation:
Performance Metrics: Measure the performance of the
ITM system, including throughput, latency, packet loss,
and QoS parameters. Learning and Adaptation: The rein-
forcement learning agent continually learns from interac-
tions with the network and adapts its policy to achieve the
defined goals, optimizing traffic management over time.
The system model described above illustrates the main
components and their interactions within the context of
applying the PGE framework to Intelligent Traffic Manage-
ment in a 5G network. It highlights the role of the PGE
in refining proto-goals, the traffic management agent’s
decision-making process based on the refined goals, and
the network control mechanisms for implementing the
traffic management actions. system model for the appli-
cation of the Proto-goal Evaluator (PGE) framework in
Intelligent Traffic Management (ITM) within a 5G network,
represented using LaTeX format:
Traffic Monitoring:
• Sensor Nodes: S i for i ∈ 1, 2, ..., N , where N is the
number of sensor nodes deployed in the network.
• Data Aggregator: D ag g , which collects and aggregates
data from the sensor nodes.
Proto-goal Definition:
• Human Designer: H , who specifies a set of
proto-goals related to ITM, denoted as PG =
PG 1 , PG 2 , ..., PG M , where M is the total number of
proto-goals defined.
• Proto-goal Repository: R, which stores the defined
proto-goals.
Proto-goal Evaluator (PGE):
• Binary Filtering Stage:
– Plausibility Evaluation: F pl (PG i ) for each proto-
goal PG i ∈ PG, where F pl determines the plausi-
bility of a goal.
3
– Pruned Proto-goals: PG pruned =
PG i |F pl (PG i ) = True, representing the remaining
plausible goals after the filtering stage.
• Weighting Stage:
– Desirability Weighting: Wdes (PG i ) for each proto-
goal PG i ∈ PG pruned , where Wdes assigns a desir-
ability weight to a goal.
– Goal Distribution: P (G : G → [0, 1]), which rep-
resents the distribution of goals based on their
desirability weights.
Goal Refinement:
• Refined Goal Set: G = G i |G i ∈ PG pruned , where G i
represents a narrower and more meaningful subset
of goals for ITM.
Traffic Management Agent:
• Reinforcement Learning Agent: A, which utilizes the
refined set of goals G as target objectives for explo-
ration and decision-making.
• State Representation: S, encoding the current network
state, including traffic conditions, resource availabil-
ity, and QoS metrics.
• Action Selection: a = A(S,G), selecting an action
based on the learned policy and the defined goals
in G.
• Reward Mechanism: R(a,G), providing feedback to
the agent based on the achievement of the goals,
incentivizing effective traffic management.
Network Control:
• Traffic Control Mechanisms: Implement congestion
control algorithms, QoS provisioning strategies, and
traffic prioritization mechanisms based on the deci-
sions made by the traffic management agent.
• Resource Allocation: Optimize the allocation of net-
work resources, such as bandwidth, power, and spec-
trum, based on the defined goals and traffic condi-
tions. This can be represented by equations specific to
the chosen traffic control mechanisms and resource
allocation algorithms, such as:
Congestion Control: C (S,G) → a c QoS Provisioning:
Q(S,G) → a q Traffic Prioritization: P (S,G) → a p Re-
source Allocation: R(S,G) → a r
where a c , a q , a p , and a r represent the selected ac-
tions for congestion control, QoS provisioning, traffic
prioritization, and resource allocation, respectively.
Evaluation and Adaptation:
– Performance Metrics: Measure the performance
of the ITM system, including throughput (T ),
latency (L), packet loss (P L), and QoS parameters
(QoS).
– Learning and Adaptation: The reinforcement
learning agent (A) continually learns from in-
teractions with the network, updating its pol-
icy based on the received rewards (R) and the
observed network state (S), aiming to optimize
traffic management over time.
 It’s important to note that the provided equations
represent a general system model and may need to
be adapted based on the specific algorithms and ap-
proaches used for traffic control, resource allocation,
and the reinforcement learning agent. Additionally,
the model can be expanded or modified to include
additional components or variables based on the
requirements and objectives of the ITM system in a
5G network.
IV. PROBLEM FORMULATION
To formulate the problem for the application of the
Proto-goal Evaluator (PGE) framework in Intelligent
Traffic Management (ITM) in a 5G network, we define
the following components and objectives:
Components:
Network: Consider a 5G network with multiple net-
work nodes, including base stations, user equipment,
and network controllers.
Traffic Flows: Traffic flows represent the communi-
cation demands within the network, originating from
various sources and destined for specific destinations.
Network Resources: These include bandwidth, power,
spectrum, and computing resources available within
the network.
Traffic Management Mechanisms: These mechanisms
control and optimize the flow of traffic within
the network, such as congestion control algorithms,
QoS provisioning strategies, and traffic prioritization
schemes.
Problem Formulation:
The goal of the ITM problem in a 5G network is
to efficiently manage and control traffic flows to
achieve desirable performance metrics and meet spe-
cific objectives. The problem can be formulated as
an optimization problem, aiming to find an optimal
configuration of traffic management mechanisms and
resource allocation to maximize the overall network
performance while satisfying specific constraints.
Mathematically, the ITM problem can be formulated
as follows:
Minimize: Objective function f (x), which captures
the performance metrics or specific goals to be
achieved, such as minimizing latency, maximizing
throughput, or minimizing packet loss.
Subject to:
. .
g 1 (x) ≤ b 1 , g 2 (x) ≤ b 2 , .. g n (x) ≤ b n , h 1 (x) = c 1 , h 2 (x) = c 2 , ..
hm (x) = c m
(1)
where x represents the decision variables that define
the configuration of traffic management mechanisms
and resource allocation, g i (x) and h j (x) are inequality
4
and equality constraints, respectively, and b i and c j
are the corresponding constraint bounds.
The decision variables x can include the selection and
configuration of congestion control algorithms, QoS
provisioning strategies, traffic prioritization schemes,
and resource allocation algorithms. These decisions
will impact traffic flow rates, resource utilization, and
overall network performance.
The constraints g i (x) and h j (x) capture the limi-
tations and requirements imposed by the network
and service-level agreements. These constraints can
encompass limitations on available resources, QoS
thresholds, capacity constraints, and any other rel-
evant constraints specific to the ITM problem in the
5G network.
By formulating the ITM problem as an optimization
problem, the objective function and constraints can
be customized to the specific goals and requirements
of the ITM system in the 5G network. The PGE
framework, with its goal refinement capabilities, can
then be applied to select and prioritize the proto-
goals within this optimization problem formulation,
guiding the exploration and decision-making process
for effective traffic management.
V. PROPOSED MODEL
the full proposed model for Intelligent Traffic Man-
agement (ITM) with the Proto-goal Evaluator (PGE)
in a 5G network, represented using LaTeX format:
Components:
Network: Let N represent the 5G network, consisting
of network nodes such as base stations, user equip-
ment, and network controllers.
Traffic Flows: Define F as the set of traffic flows in
the network. Each traffic flow f i ∈ F originates from
a source node s i and is destined for a target node t i .
Network Resources: Consider the available network
resources, including bandwidth, power, spectrum,
and computing resources. These resources can be
represented by the vector R = [R 1 , R 2 , . . . , R m ], where
R j denotes the availability of resource j .
Traffic Management Mechanisms: Let M represent
the set of traffic management mechanisms, includ-
ing congestion control algorithms, QoS provisioning
strategies, and traffic prioritization schemes.
Proposed Model:
The proposed model for ITM in a 5G network with the
PGE involves the following components and steps:
Proto-goal Definition:
– Human Designer: A human designer defines a set
of proto-goals P G related to ITM, capturing ob-
jectives such as minimizing latency, maximizing
throughput, and optimizing resource utilization.
PGE Goal Refinement:
– Proto-goal Evaluator (PGE):
∗ Binary Filtering Stage:
 · Plausibility Evaluation: F pl (PG i ) evaluates
the plausibility of each proto-goal PG i ∈
P G , determining if it can be achieved
within the network’s capabilities and con-
straints.
· Pruned Proto-goals: P G pruned = tor A = [A 1 , A 2 , . . . , A m ], based on the decisions
PG i | F pl(PG i ) = True represents the subset
of proto-goals that pass the plausibility
evaluation.
∗ Weighting Stage:
· Desirability Weighting: Wdes (PG i ) assigns a
desirability weight to each proto-goal PG i ∈
P G pruned, reflecting its importance or rel-
evance.
· Goal Distribution: P (G : G → [0, 1]) repre-
sents the distribution over the refined goals
G based on their desirability weights.
– Refined Goal Set: G = G i | G i ∈ P G pruned de-
notes the set of refined goals obtained from the
PGE.
Traffic Management Optimization:
– Decision Variables: Let x represent the decision
variables, which define the configuration of traf-
fic management mechanisms and resource allo-
cation strategies.
– Objective Function: Minimize the objective func-
tion f (x), capturing the desired goals of ITM such
as minimizing latency, maximizing throughput,
or optimizing resource utilization.
– Constraints:
∗ Constraints:
g i (x) ≤ b i , ∀i ∈ 1, 2, . . . , n, h j (x) = c j , ∀ j ∈ 1, 2, . . . , m,
where g i (x) and h j (x) represent inequality and
equality constraints, respectively, and b i and
c j are the corresponding constraint bounds.
Traffic Management Decision-Making:
∗ Traffic Management Agent: Utilize a reinforce-
ment learning agent that incorporates the re-
fined set of goals G to guide its exploration
and decision-making process.
∗ State Representation: Define S as the network
state representation, encompassing informa-
tion such as traffic conditions, resource avail-
ability, and QoS metrics.
∗ Action Selection: Select an action a = A(S,G)
based on the learned policy of the traffic
management agent, considering the refined
goals in G.
∗ Reward Mechanism: Assign rewards R(a,G) to
provide feedback to the agent based on the
achievement of the goals, encouraging effec-
tive traffic management.
Network Control:
∗ Traffic Control Mechanisms: Implement con- 17: end
gestion control algorithms, QoS provisioning
5
strategies, and traffic prioritization mecha-
nisms based on the selected actions and deci-
sions made by the traffic management agent.
∗ Resource Allocation: Optimize the allocation
of network resources, represented by the vec-
made by the traffic management agent and the
defined goals in G.
By formulating the problem with the proposed
model, the ITM system aims to find an optimal
configuration of traffic management mechanisms
and resource allocation strategies, guided by the
refined goals identified by the PGE, to minimize
latency, maximize throughput, optimize resource
utilization, and achieve other desired objectives.
The reinforcement learning agent learns and
adapts its policy based on the observed network
state, interactions with the network, and the feed-
back received from achieving the refined goals.
Note that the specific formulation of the ob-
jective function f (x), the constraints g i (x) and
h j (x), as well as the implementation details
of the traffic control mechanisms and re-
source allocation algorithms, may vary based
on the requirements and characteristics of the
ITM system in the 5G network. [linesnum-
bered,ruled,vlined]algorithm2e
Algorithm 1: Intelligent Traffic Management with
PGE Algorithm
Input : Network N , Traffic Flows F , Network
Resources R, Traffic Management
Mechanisms M
Output: Optimal configuration of traffic
management mechanisms and resource
allocation
1: Define Proto-goals P G ;
2: Define PGE stages: Binary Filtering and Weighting;
3: Obtain Refined Goals G using PGE;
4: Define Decision Variables x;
5: Define Objective Function f (x);
6: Define Constraints g i (x) ≤ b i and h j (x) = c j ;
7: Initialize Traffic Management Agent A;
8: Initialize State Representation S;
9: while not converged do
10: Select Refined Goal G i from G for current
iteration;
11: Select Action a = A(S,G i );
12: Implement Traffic Control Mechanisms based
on a;
13: Optimize Resource Allocation based on a;
14: Observe Network State S;
15: Receive Rewards R(a,G i );
16: Update Agent’s Policy and Learning Model;
The algorithm provides a general structure for the
ITM system using the proposed model, based on
the specific goals, constraints, and implementa-
tion details of the ITM system in the 5G network.
VI. S IMULATION PARAMETERS
To conduct the simulations, we set the following
parameters to establish a realistic traffic simula-
tion environment:
∗ Simulation duration: 1 hour
∗ Number of vehicles: 500
∗ Road network size: 5 km x 5 km
∗ Traffic demand: Varied based on time of day
and traffic patterns
∗ Communication range: 100 meters
∗ Traffic flow model: Intelligent driver model
(IDM)
∗ Communication protocol: Dedicated Short
Range Communications (DSRC)
∗ Traffic control mechanism: Dynamic Traffic
Signal Control (DTSC)
These parameters were selected to represent a
typical urban traffic scenario and capture the
complexities and dynamics of real-world traf-
fic conditions. The simulation environment in-
corporates realistic traffic demand patterns and
communication capabilities among vehicles and
infrastructure for effective traffic management.
Fig. 2. Objective Function
Fig 1 defines the An objective function, also
known as a loss function or cost function, is
a mathematical function used to quantify the
performance or quality of a model or algorithm.
It serves as a measure to optimize the model’s
parameters or guide the learning process during
training.
In the context of traffic management or any other
problem, the objective function represents the
desired outcome or goal that the model seeks
6
to achieve. The specific form of the objective
function depends on the nature of the problem
and the goals of the analysis.
For instance, in regression tasks, the objective
function could be the mean squared error (MSE),
which measures the average squared difference
between the predicted values and the actual
values. The objective is to minimize the MSE,
indicating a better fit between the model’s pre-
dictions and the true values.
In classification tasks, the objective function
could be the cross-entropy loss or the hinge loss,
depending on the specific algorithm or model
used. These functions penalize incorrect predic-
tions and encourage the model to make accurate
class assignments.
The choice of the objective function is crucial
as it determines the optimization direction and
guides the learning process. Different objective
functions may prioritize different aspects of the
problem. For example, in traffic management,
the objective function may prioritize minimizing
congestion, optimizing traffic flow, or improving
overall system performance.
The objective function can be optimized using
various optimization techniques, such as gra-
dient descent, stochastic gradient descent, or
evolutionary algorithms. The optimization pro-
cess involves adjusting the model’s parameters
iteratively to minimize the objective function or
maximize the desired outcome.
By defining a suitable objective function and
optimizing it during the training or optimization
process, models can be guided towards achieving
specific goals and improving their performance
in traffic management or any other domain.
It is important to carefully define the objective
function to align with the problem objectives
and consider the trade-offs between different
performance metrics and goals. The choice of
the objective function should be based on the
specific requirements and characteristics of the
problem at hand.

Fig. 3. Accuracy,Precision, Recall
Fig 2 discusses about the accuracy, precision, and
recall, which are commonly used performance
metrics in the context of binary classification:
Accuracy: Accuracy measures the overall correct-
ness of the model’s predictions. It is the ratio
of correctly predicted instances (true positives
and true negatives) to the total number of in-
stances. The formula for accuracy is as follows:
Accuracy = True Positives + True Negatives True
Positives + True Negatives + False Positives +
False Negatives Accuracy= True Positives+True
Negatives+False Positives+False Negatives True
Positives+True Negatives
Accuracy provides an overall measure of how well
the model classifies instances, regardless of their
positive or negative label. However, it may not be
the most suitable metric in imbalanced datasets
where the classes have unequal representations.
Precision: Precision measures the model’s abil-
ity to correctly identify positive instances out
of all the instances predicted as positive. It is
calculated as the ratio of true positives to the
sum of true positives and false positives: Pre-
cision = True Positives True Positives + False
Positives Precision= True Positives+False Positives
True Positives
Precision emphasizes the correctness of positive
predictions and is useful when the cost of false
positives is high. It indicates the reliability of the
model’s positive predictions.
Recall (Sensitivity or True Positive Rate): Recall
measures the model’s ability to correctly identify
positive instances out of all the actual positive
instances. It is calculated as the ratio of true
positives to the sum of true positives and false
negatives: Recall = True Positives True Positives
+ False Negatives Recall= True Positives+False
Negatives True Positives
Recall focuses on capturing all positive instances
and is particularly important when the cost of
false negatives is high. It indicates the model’s
7
ability to avoid missing positive instances.
These metrics are interconnected and offer dif-
ferent insights into the performance of a binary
classification model. Accuracy provides an overall
evaluation, while precision and recall focus on
specific aspects of the model’s predictions. De-
pending on the problem domain and the relative
importance of false positives and false negatives,
one metric may be more relevant than the others.
When evaluating models in the context of traffic
management or any other binary classification
problem, it is essential to consider multiple per-
formance metrics to gain a comprehensive un-
derstanding of the model’s strengths and weak-
nesses.
Fig. 4. Performance Evaluation
Fig 3 shows the Performance evaluation which
is a crucial aspect of assessing the effectiveness
and efficiency of models or algorithms in solving
a specific problem. In the context of traffic man-
agement or any other domain involving binary
classification, performance evaluation involves
measuring the accuracy and effectiveness of the
model’s predictions.
Various performance evaluation metrics are used
to assess different aspects of the model’s per-
formance. Some commonly used metrics include
accuracy, precision, recall, F1-score, area under
the curve (AUC), and mean squared error (MSE),
among others. These metrics provide insights
into different aspects of the model’s performance,
such as overall correctness, ability to correctly
identify positive instances, ability to avoid miss-
ing positive instances, and the trade-off between
true positive rate and false positive rate.
Performance evaluation involves comparing the
model’s predictions with the ground truth or ac-
tual values to calculate these metrics. The choice
of evaluation metrics depends on the specific
problem and the evaluation goals. For instance,
in traffic management, accuracy, precision, and
recall can help assess the model’s ability to accu-
rately classify traffic situations, detect congestion,
and make correct traffic-related decisions.
Performance evaluation is often conducted us-
ing labeled datasets, where the ground truth is
known for each instance. The model’s predictions
are then compared with the actual values, and
the performance metrics are calculated based on
the comparison. These metrics provide quanti-
tative measures of the model’s performance and
allow for objective comparison between different
models or algorithms.
In addition to individual metrics, performance
evaluation can also involve generating visual
representations of the model’s performance. For
instance, ROC curves can be plotted to visual-
ize the trade-off between true positive rate and
false positive rate. Precision-recall curves can be
used to visualize the precision and recall values
across different classification thresholds. These
visualizations provide a comprehensive view of
the model’s performance and aid in comparative
analysis.
Overall, performance evaluation is an essential
step in assessing the reliability and effectiveness
of models or algorithms in solving real-world
problems. By utilizing appropriate evaluation
metrics and techniques, researchers and practi-
tioners can gain insights into the strengths and
weaknesses of the models and make informed
decisions for improvement and optimization.
Fig. 5. Specificity
Fig 4 defines the Specificity, it refers to the ability
of a model to correctly identify negative instances
among all the actual negative instances. In the
8
context of traffic management or any binary clas-
sification problem, specificity is a performance
metric that measures the model’s effectiveness in
identifying true negative cases.
Specificity is calculated as the ratio of true nega-
tive predictions to the sum of true negatives and
false positives
A higher specificity value indicates that the model
has a lower rate of falsely predicting negative
instances as positive. In the context of traffic
management, high specificity implies that the
system can accurately identify non-congested or
normal traffic situations, allowing for more effi-
cient traffic control and resource allocation.
When comparing different models or approaches
like gradient descent and genetic algorithms,
specificity serves as an important evaluation
metric to assess their performance in correctly
identifying negative instances and distinguishing
them from positive instances. It provides insights
into the model’s ability to handle non-congested
traffic scenarios accurately, which is crucial for
effective traffic management and control systems.
By examining specificity values across differ-
ent models or methods, we can identify which
approach performs better in terms of accu-
rately identifying negative instances and miti-
gating false positives in the context of traffic
management or any other binary classification
problem.
Fig. 6. ROC
Fig 5 represents ROC (Receiver Operating Char-
acteristic) it is a graphical plot that illustrates the
trade-off between the true positive rate (TPR)
and the false positive rate (FPR) for a binary
classification model. It is a commonly used eval-
uation metric for assessing the performance of
classification models, including those used in
traffic management.
The ROC curve is created by plotting the TPR
against the FPR at various classification thresh-
olds. Each point on the curve represents a spe-
cific threshold setting, and the curve illustrates
the model’s performance across the entire range
of possible thresholds.
The true positive rate, also known as sensitivity or
recall, represents the proportion of actual positive
instances that are correctly identified as positive
by the model. It is calculated as:
TPR=True Positives+False Negatives
The false positive rate, on the other hand, mea-
sures the proportion of actual negative instances
that are incorrectly classified as positive by the
model. It is calculated as:
FPR=False Positives+True Negatives
By varying the classification threshold, the true
positive rate and false positive rate change, re-
sulting in different points on the ROC curve. A
perfect classification model would have a TPR of
1 and an FPR of 0, which would correspond to
a point in the top-left corner of the ROC curve.
The diagonal line from (0,0) to (1,1) represents
the performance of a random classifier.
The area under the ROC curve (AUC) is often
used as a summary measure of the model’s per-
formance. A higher AUC indicates better discrim-
inatory power and a model with better overall
performance.
The ROC curve provides a visual representation
of the model’s ability to balance the true posi-
tive rate and false positive rate across different
classification thresholds. It allows for easy com-
parison of different models or algorithms, with
a higher curve indicating superior performance
in distinguishing between positive and negative
instances.
In the context of traffic management or any
binary classification problem, the ROC curve can
help assess the effectiveness of different models
in predicting traffic conditions, identifying con-
gestion, or making accurate traffic-related deci-
sions.
R EFERENCES
[1] Teng Liu; Xiaosong Hu; Weihao Hu; Yuan Zou; "A
Heuristic Planning Reinforcement Learning-Based En-
ergy Management for Power-Split Plug-in Hybrid Elec-
tric Vehicles", IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRIAL
INFORMATICS, 2019.
[2] Hao-Fan Yang; Tharam S. Dillon; Elizabeth Chang; Yi-
Ping Phoebe Chen; "Optimized Configuration of Ex-
ponential Smoothing and Extreme Learning Machine
9
for Traffic Flow Forecasting", IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON
INDUSTRIAL INFORMATICS, 2019.
[3] Bigi Varghese Philip; Tansu Alpcan; Jiong Jin; Marimuthu
Palaniswami; "Distributed Real-Time IoT for Au-
tonomous Vehicles", IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUS-
TRIAL INFORMATICS, 2019.
[4] ] Mu Shengdong; Xiong Zhengxian; Tian Yixiang; "Intel-
ligent Traffic Control System Based on Cloud Comput-
ing and Big Data Mining", IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON
INDUSTRIAL INFORMATICS, 2019
[5] Gustavo Künzel; Leandro Soares Indrusiak; Carlos Ed-
uardo Pereira; "Latency and Lifetime Enhancements
in Industrial Wireless Sensor Networks: A Q-Learning
Approach for Graph Routing", IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON
INDUSTRIAL INFORMATICS, 2020.
[6] Yuanguo Bi; Guangjie Han; Chuan Lin; Yan Peng;
Huayan Pu; Yazhou Jia; "Intelligent Quality of Service
Aware Traffic Forwarding for Software-Defined Network-
ing/Open Shortest Path First Hybrid Industrial Internet",
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRIAL INFORMATICS,
2020.
[7] ] Houlian Wang; Gongbo Zhou; Laksh Bhatia; Zhencai
Zhu; Wei Li; Julie A. McCann; "Energy-Neutral and QoS-
Aware Protocol in Wireless Sensor Networks for Health
Monitoring of Hoisting Systems", IEEE TRANSACTIONS
ON INDUSTRIAL INFORMATICS, 2020.
[8] Seifeddine Messaoud; Abbas Bradai; Olfa Ben Ahmed;
Pham Tran Anh Quang; Mohamed Atri; M. Shamim
Hossain; "Deep Federated Q-Learning-Based Network
Slicing for Industrial IoT", IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON
INDUSTRIAL INFORMATICS, 2021
[9] Dong Yang; A. Mahmood; S. Hassan; M. Gidlund; "Guest
Editorial: Industrial IoT and Sensor Networks in 5G-
and-Beyond Wireless Communication", IEEE TRANSAC-
TIONS ON INDUSTRIAL INFORMATICS, 2022.
[10] Dong Yang; A. Mahmood; S. Hassan; M. Gidlund; "Guest
Editorial: Industrial IoT and Sensor Networks in 5G-
and-Beyond Wireless Communication", IEEE TRANSAC-
TIONS ON INDUSTRIAL INFORMATICS, 2022
[11] Xiaoding Wang; Jia Hu; Hui Lin; S. Garg; G. Kaddoum;
M. J. Piran; M. S. Hossain; "QoS and Privacy-Aware
Routing for 5G-Enabled Industrial Internet of Things:
A Federated Reinforcement Learning Approach", IEEE
TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRIAL INFORMATICS, 2022.
[12] ] Payam Rahimi; C. Chrysostomou; H. Pervaiz; V. Vas-
siliou; Q. Ni; "Joint Radio Resource Allocation and
Beamforming Optimization for Industrial Internet of
Things in Software-Defined Networking-Based Virtual
Fog-Radio Access Network 5G-and-Beyond Wireless En-
vironments", IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRIAL
INFORMATICS, 2022
[13] ] Ali Ranjha; G. Kaddoum; K. Dev; "Facilitating URLLC
in UAV-Assisted Relay Systems With Multiple-Mobile
Robots for 6G Networks: A Prospective of Agriculture
4.0", IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRIAL INFOR-
MATICS, 2022
[14] ] X. Kong; Gaohui Duan; Mingliang Hou; Guojiang Shen;
Hongya Wang; Xiaoran Yan; M. Collotta; "Deep Rein-
forcement Learning-Based Energy-Efficient Edge Com-
puting for Internet of Vehicles", IEEE TRANSACTIONS
ON INDUSTRIAL INFORMATICS, 2022.
[15] Sicheng Li; Weihao Hu; Di Cao; Zhenyuan Zhang; Qi
Huang; Zhe Chen; F. Blaabjerg; "A Multiagent Deep
Reinforcement Learning Based Approach for The Op-
timization of Transformer Life Using Coordinated Elec-
tric Vehicles", IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRIAL
INFORMATICS, 2022
[16] Shupeng Wang; Laisen Nie; Guojun Li; Yixuan Wu;
Zhaolong Ning; "A Multitask Learning-Based Network
Traffic Prediction Approach for SDN-Enabled Industrial
Internet of Things", IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUS-
TRIAL INFORMATICS, 2022.
[17] Yuanlong Cao; Ruiwen Ji; Lejun Ji; Gangyue Lei;
Hao Wang; Xun Shao; "l 2 -MPTCP: A Learning-Driven
Latency-Aware Multipath Transport Scheme for Indus-
 trial Internet Applications", IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON
INDUSTRIAL INFORMATICS, 2022
[18] Wenhao Fan; Zeyu Chen; Zhibo Hao; Yi Su; Fan Wu; B.
Tang; Yuan’an Liu; "DNN Deployment, Task Offloading,
and Resource Allocation for Joint Task Inference in IIoT",
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRIAL INFORMATICS,
2023

10