Journal of Intelligent Transportation Systems

Technology, Planning, and Operations

ISSN: 1547-2450 (Print) 1547-2442 (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/gits20

A dynamic merge assistance method based on

the concept of instantaneous virtual trajectory for
vehicle-to-infrastructure connected vehicles

Xiaowen Jiang, Peter J. Jin & Yizhou Wang

To cite this article: Xiaowen Jiang, Peter J. Jin & Yizhou Wang (2020): A dynamic merge
assistance method based on the concept of instantaneous virtual trajectory for vehicle-
to-infrastructure connected vehicles, Journal of Intelligent Transportation Systems, DOI:
10.1080/15472450.2020.1718499

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/15472450.2020.1718499

Published online: 04 Feb 2020.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 5

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=gits20
JOURNAL OF INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS
https://doi.org/10.1080/15472450.2020.1718499

A dynamic merge assistance method based on the concept of instantaneous

virtual trajectory for vehicle-to-infrastructure connected vehicles
Xiaowen Jianga,b, Peter J. Jina , and Yizhou Wanga
a
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, Piscataway Township, NJ, USA;
b
School of Transportation and Logistic, Southwest Jiaotong University, Chengdu, Sichuan, China

ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY

Lane-changing activities near freeway merging, diverging, and weaving sections are one of Received 28 February 2017
the major factors leading to recurrent bottleneck congestion. In recent years, microscopic Revised 14 January 2020
dynamic merging assistance (DMA) methods are found efficient to improve mobility and Accepted 16 January 2020
safety in merging areas. The article proposes a solution, the connected vehicle (CV) vehicle-
KEYWORDS
to-infrastructure (V2I)-based dynamic merge assistance (DMA) method, analyzing vehicle connected vehicle; dynamic
trajectory data collected at CV roadside units (RSU) and implements a “vehicle-gap” pairing merge control;
process for vehicle-gap synchronized control. The vehicle-gap pairing is determined by instantaneous virtual
dynamically predicting their merging potential per the relationship between the trajectory; vehicle-to-
“instantaneous virtual trajectories” (IVTs) of mainline and onramp vehicles. The IVTs are infrastructure (V2I)
generated according to the prevailing speed profiles on both ramp and mainline through application
lane. Other than those automated control-based methods, this article focuses on providing
a realistic speed instruction to human drivers through CV communication. A Cooperative
Adaptive Cruise Control model is adopted to calculate such speed instruction. The paired
onramp/mainline vehicles who follow the speed instruction can form a putative platoon so
that their speed and location can be synchronized all through the merging area to ensure
the gap-opening and catching-up. The proposed method is evaluated within a simulation
network based on the field data collected on Interstate 35 at Austin, TX. The proposed
method is tested in a microscopic traffic simulation environment using VISSIM external
driver model Application Programing Interface. The simulation results indicated significant
reduced average travel time at merge sections during congestion and increased time-to-
collision during merging compared with other existing microscopic merge control models.

Introduction Most of the macroscopic methods encounter the

Freeway merging sections are critical locations on
the freeway at which recurrent bottleneck congestion
usually occurs. The insufficient gaps in mainline traf-
fic and the slowdowns for yielding to merging vehicles
can lead to traffic breakdowns on both mainline
and ramp. Macroscopic Active Traffic Management
(ATM) strategies can help improve merging efficiency
(Mirshahi et al., 2007). Despite some positive
evaluation results from simulation and field studies,
those macroscopic merge control strategies have their
limitations. Macroscopic merge control strategies
rely on static or dynamic message signs to convey
control information. The microscopic methods include
Adaptive Cruise Control/Cooperative Adaptive Cruise
Control (ACC/CACC)-based methods and some intel-
ligent Dynamic Merging Assistance (DMA) methods.
control limitations due to the needs of additional
special roadside sign and signal systems and the issues
of ensuring driver compliance. Most of the merge
control methods work either for one traffic scenario
(e.g., high-speed, low-speed, congested, or stop-and-
go) or switching between multiple scenarios. The
control signals can be inefficient by using one-fits-all
macroscopic messaging and can be interpreted in
great variation by drivers.
In this study, we propose a Connected Vehicle
(CV) Vehicle-to-Infrastructure (V2I) based Dynamic
Merge Assistance (DMA) system (“CV-DMA”). The
proposed CV-DMA system implements a microscopic
merge control method through the whole merging
area by a roadside unit (RSU). The control signal
distributed to the driver is a speed instruction per the
real-time microscopic traffic condition. By following

CONTACT Xiaowen Jiang Xiaowen.jiang@rutgers.edu Graduate Research Assistant Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Rutgers,
The State University of New Jersey, Piscataway Township, NJ, USA.
ß 2020 Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
2 X. JIANG ET AL.
Figure 1. The level of ramp versus mainline control strategies of representative microscopic DMA algorithms.
the speed instruction, the vehicle-gap pair’s relative
positions can be synchronized for smooth and safe
merging. A VISSIM model is built based on field data
collected from Interstate 35 in Austin, TX. The safety
and mobility performance of the proposed model is
evaluated and compared with existing microscopic
DMA models.
Literature review
The existing microscopic DMA methods primarily
have three different ways to improve merging activ-
ities: (1) mainline vehicles to open-up gaps for ramp
vehicles (Hayat, Park, & Smith, 2014; Jin, Fang, Jiang,
DeGaspari, & Walton, 2017; Park, Bhamidipati, &
Smith, 2011; Scarinci, Heydecker, & Hegyi, 2015); (2)
controlling ramp vehicles to fit into the mainline traf-
fic ( Buhr, Radke, Kirk, & Drew, 1969; Kachroo & Li,
1997; HI Klee, 1973; Harold Klee, 1981; Tignor, 1975;
True & Rosen, 1973 ); or (3) controlling both main-
line and ramp vehicles (Davis, 2007; Lu, Tan,
Shladover, & Hedrick, 2004; Marinescu, Curn,
lowing sections are positioned based on their mainline


Bouroche, & Cahill, 2012; Marinescu, Curn, Slot,
Bouroche, & Cahill, 2010; Milanes, Godoy, Villagra, &
Perez, 2011; Park, Su, Hayat, & Smith, 2014; Ran,
Leight, & Chang, 1999; Rios-Torres & Malikopoulos,
2017a; Xie, Zhang, Gartner, & Arsava, 2017; Zhou,
Qu, & Jin, 2017). The automation level of those meth-
ods evolves from guidance information such as
roadside message board (Jin et al., 2017; True &
Rosen, 1973) and traffic signal light (Buhr et al., 1969;
Klee, 1973; 1981; Tignor, 1975; True & Rosen, 1973)
to intelligent driving control such as Automated
Highway System (AHS) (Kachroo & Li, 1997; Lu
et al., 2004; Ran et al., 1999), ACC (Davis, 2007) and
other automated systems (Davis, 2007; Kachroo & Li,
1997; Letter & Elefteriadou, 2017; Lu et al., 2004; Ran
et al., 1999; Scarinci & Heydecker, 2014). Recently,
the CV technologies enable control methods by taking
advantage of the relatively long-range vehicle-to-X
(V2X) communication.
The CV technologies led to a better awareness of
traffic environment throughout the area as well as a
better delivery of control signals directed toward the
drivers or vehicle controllers (Hayat et al., 2014;
Letter & Elefteriadou, 2017; Marinescu et al., 2010,
2012; Milanes et al., 2011; Park et al., 2011, 2014;
Rios-Torres & Malikopoulos, 2017a, 2017b; Xie et al.,
2017; Zhou et al., 2017). Figure 1 illustrates how the
representative algorithms to be discussed in the fol-
and ramp control strategies. The control strategy of
the proposed CV-DMA method is between Davis
et al. and Park et al.’s models.
Some existing CV-based DMA models (Jiang, Jin,
Wan, & Wang, 2017; Letter & Elefteriadou, 2017;
Marinescu et al., 2010, 2012; Milanes et al., 2011;
Rios-Torres & Malikopoulos, 2017a, 2017b; Xie et al.,

2017; Zhou et al., 2017) show significant positive
effect of DMA on mobility. Those models can also be
significantly enhanced with Connected Automated
Vehicle (CAV) technologies. However, one weak point
of these existing methods is that they usually consider
a fixed point as the target merging position. It may
limit the flexibility of the control strategy. Moreover,
some of the existing methods only work in a short-
range network to involve a small mainline-ramp
multi-car (usually three-car) group (e.g., Davis model),
while other long-range methods require additional
control signal or fully automated control (e.g., AHS
methods). This article focuses on a method which
implements a dynamic merging strategy with a vary-
ing predicted merging position. Meanwhile, the pro-
posed system covers a long-range merging area and
utilizes the most common vehicle longitudinal control
model, i.e., ACC/CACC, to provide speed instruction
to human drivers.
Methodology
The proposed CV-DMA method is an expansion and
improvement of the microscopic implementation of
the Gap Metering method. It adopts the concept of
gap metering that the mainline vehicle forwardly
yields to on-ramp vehicle, and it also controls on-
ramp vehicles to approach the privileged gaps gener-
ated for them. The method’s control features include:

On-Demand Gap Generation: This method applies
a pairing process based on the prediction of merg-
ing potential. The pairing process can associate the
mainline gaps with on-ramp vehicles. Thus, the
mainline vehicles only open and keep gaps for on-
ramp vehicles which are possible to naturally
merge without any additional controls. Compared
with those methods which unintendedly open gaps
(e.g., Gap Metering), this proposed method has a
smaller impact on the mainline traffic and has a
more efficient utilization of mainline gaps.

Gap Synchronization: While this method controls
mainline vehicles to open and keep gaps, the main-
line vehicles’ desired speeds and accelerations do
not only depend on the status of their preceding
vehicles but also the status of their paired on-ramp
vehicles. Meanwhile, on-ramp vehicles proactively
approach the paired gaps by following their pre-
ceding on-ramp vehicles as well as following the
mainline gaps (putatively preceding mainline
vehicles). The synchronization reduces waste of
JOURNAL OF INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS 3
mainline gaps and makes the merging smoother
and safer.

Full Utilization of Acceleration Lane: This method
controls vehicles throughout the whole merging
area. Thus, the mainline and on-ramp vehicles can
gradually change their speed while approaching the
predicted merging location and finally reach the
desired merging speed. Unlike those methods
which control vehicles’ speed or acceleration onsite
near a fixed merging point, this method takes full
utilization of acceleration lanes and lane capacity,
and reduces the impact of merging vehicles on
other traffic.
The proposed method is designed to improve the
mobility and safety of merging traffic by the fulfill-
ment of the following control objectives:

Mobility Impact: Decrease the total travel time of
both mainline and on-ramp traffic, and increase
the vehicles’ average speed in influenced links.

Safety Impact: Increase the time-to-collision
(TTC), and increase the gap distance between the
mainline lagging vehicle and on-ramp merging
vehicle during lane-changing.
The framework of the proposed CV-DMA method
is shown in Figure 2, and the detail of each step is
described in the following sections.
Algorithm assumptions
The proposed V2I-based microscopic DMA method
requires RSUs and V2I communication. RSUs collects
the vehicle trajectory data, compute and distribute the
driving guidance signals to the CV OBUs. The cover-
age area of RSU includes both merging area and
upstream of the merging area for the preparation of
vehicle-gap pairing. Ramp and mainline vehicles need
to implement onboard units (OBUs) to reports vehicle
location, velocity, and acceleration through CV com-
munication and receive control signals in the form of
dynamic speed guidance and lane-changing indica-
tions. The proposed model is based on following
assumptions.

100% CV-equipped and perfect communication:
The proposed model assumes full trajectory sens-
ing through CV network reporting or video/radar
sensors and 100% CV market penetration like
those in earlier DMA studies. The range of CV
communication is limited while the package drop
4 X. JIANG ET AL.
Figure 2. Control framework of CV-DMA system.
rate is inevitable. However, this paper assumes per-
fect communication without any package loss, and
the communication range covers the whole area.
The DMA control strategies under a mixed vehicu-
lar environment with manually controlled vehicles,
CVs, and connected automated vehicles (CAVs) as
well as the communication failure will be discussed
in future studies.

Requiring Connected Vehicle Environment: As
stated above, the proposed method requires CV
environment. Thus, the proposed system has the
same requirement and limitation with other typical
CV-based system, i.e., the communication range,
precision of vehicle positioning, communication
delay, etc.

Guided Manual Vehicle Control: The proposed
system only provides guidance signals including
speed suggestion and lane-changing signals.
Drivers need to follow the guidance signal manu-
ally. Moreover, it is assumed that drivers maintain
the same acceleration during the perception-reac-
tion process. And the proposed model currently
assumes 100% compliance rate in executing the
guidance signals.
CV V2I dynamic merge assistance
(DMA) algorithm
Linear-referencing spatial coordinate system and
map matching
As illustrated in Figure 3, a linear referencing spatial
coordinate system is used in this study for vehicle
positioning. Vehicles’ locations can be identified as
two-dimension GPS points by onboard GPS. The pro-
posed linear-referencing system can put vehicles in
different lanes (either mainline or on-ramp) together
in a unified coordinate system, and also assist vehicle-
gap coordination.
The linear-referencing spatial coordinate w is
defined as the accumulative distance along the center-
lines of lanes from the head of the vehicle to the end-
point P0 of the acceleration lane. The conversion from
two-dimension GPS location P ðx , y Þ to the linear
referencing system coordinate w takes the follow-
ing steps:
Step 1. Calculate the link length based on the pro-
jected coordinates of the starting point ðsxi , syi Þ and
the ending point ðsxiþ1 , syiþ1 Þ on the centerline of a
link (i.e., lane-center).
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
li ¼ ðsxi  sxiþ1 Þ2 þ ðsyi  syiþ1 Þ2 (1)
Step 2. Calculate the link offset gi of each upstream
location P ðx , y Þ on link i as follows.
Define the perpendicular vector as the following
ða, bÞ ¼ ðsyiþ1  syi , sxi  sxiþ1 Þ
In order to map the vehicle’s GPS point P ðx , y Þ
onto the link segment i, the equation of the perpen-
dicular line of link segment i containing point
P ðx , y Þ can be described as:
bx  ay þ ay  bx ¼ 0
Therefore, its projected point PP ðpx , py Þ on the
link segment i can be calculated as the following.
 JOURNAL OF INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS 5

8
>
> a ay  bx
>
> px ¼ yp  
>
> b b
< ay  bx ðsxiþ1 syi  sxi syiþ1 Þ
 a2 y  abx  bðsxiþ1 syi  sxi syiþ1 Þ
>
> 
¼ b a ¼
>
> py
>
> b a b2 þ a2
: þ
a b

To check if the projected point PP ðpx , py Þ is
within link segment i, the following conditions are
evaluated.
 (4)
ðsxi  px Þ  ðpx  sxiþ1 Þ  0
(2)
ðsyi  py Þ  ðpy  syiþ1 Þ  0
Assuming the projected coordinate is on link J, then
the link offset of PP on link J equals the following.
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi

gJ ¼ ðpx  sxJ Þ2 þ ðpy  syJ Þ2
Finally, the linear referencing coordinate w of
P ðx , y Þ can be calculated by the following.
X
J1
w¼ li þ gJ (3)
i¼0
Instantaneous lane speed profiles and
instantaneous virtual trajectories
The instantaneous virtual trajectory (IVT) is intro-
duced to represent a prediction of the potential trajec-
tory toward the merging area. The merging potential
can be predicted by checking the relationship between
the IVTs of mainline vehicles and on-ramp vehicles.
The IVTs are generated based on the instantaneous
speed profiles (ISPs) of all the vehicles in the same
lane. We define the instantaneous speed profile (ISP)
of any individual vehicle M in mainline merge lane or
R on the ramp at time t as a profile which consists of
speed, location, and the current timestamp. All ISPs
are gathered distinctly in two instantaneous lane speed
profile sets (ILSP) by their lanes.

ISPm ðt Þ ¼ fum ; wm ; t g, ISPm ðtÞ 2 ILSPM ðtÞ
ISPr ðt Þ ¼ fur ; wr ; t g, ISPr ðtÞ 2 ILSPR ðtÞ
Where u, w are the instantaneous speed and loca-
tion respectively, m, r are the indexes of mainline and
on-ramp vehicles at time t: For the convenience of
discussion, we assume m and r do not overlap, for
example, all mainline vehicles are indexed as 1,2,3,
… , and etc.; while all ramp vehicles are indexed as
9001, 9002, … , and etc.
The IVT of any individual vehicles at time t can be
obtained by the ILSP which it belongs to. The x-axis
of an IVT is defined as time coordinates s while the
y-axis is defined as the linear referencing coordinates
W: A spot in an IVT at time t is defined as:
Gðt Þ ¼ fs, Wg (5)
Take a mainline vehicle m as an example, its ISP is
represented as ISPm ðtÞ, ISPm ðt Þ 2 ISLPM ðtÞ: Define
the leftmost starting point of its IVT as:
Gm ðtÞ ¼ fsm , Wm g ¼ ft, wm g, Gm ðt Þ 2 IVTm ðtÞ (6)
The y-axis coordinates of the following spots of
this IVT can be determined by the ISPs of the preced-
ing vehicles of vehicle m in the same ILSP. We can
find these ISPs as:
ISPk ðt Þ ¼ fuk ; wk ; t g, k 2 ½0, m  1, ISPk ðt Þ
2 ILSPM ðtÞ (7)

Figure 3. Illustration of the linear-referencing coordinate system.

6 X. JIANG ET AL.
Figure 4. Schematic of IVT for vehicle m ¼ 10 in mainline at t ¼ 4617 s.
Define m  1 spots after Gm ðtÞ as:
Gk ðt Þ ¼ fsk , Wk ; t g ¼ fsk , wk ; t g, k 2 ½0, m  1 (8)
We call these spots Gk ðtÞ as guide spots, where
G0 ðtÞ is the rightmost guide spot. Their y-axis coordi-
nates are the same as the linear-referencing spatial
coordinates of the preceding vehicles of vehicle m at
time t: The x-axis time coordinate sk is calculated
through the expected time lapse traveling from
the location of upstreaming guide spot Gkþ1 ðtÞ to the
location of the current guide spot Gk ðtÞ when
the travel speed between two guide spots are assumed
the same as the speed of ukþ1 2 ISPkþ1 ðtÞ:

m1 w
 Segm ¼ ðGm , Gmþ1 Þ
X jþ1  wj
 (10)
sk ¼ t þ ^s k ¼ t þ , k 2 ½0, m  1
ujþ1
j¼k
(9)
In which uj is the speed of the vehicle; wj is linear
reference coordinate of the vehicle. Thus, the time
interval between any two guide spots is the time head-
way, and ^s k is the predicted travel time from vehicle
m to the location of its preceding vehicle k at time t:
After G0 ðtÞ, the IVT is predicted by assuming travel-
ing at a constant speed u0 2 ISP0 ðtÞ toward the end of
the acceleration lane.
Figure 4 illustrates a sample IVT of a mainline
vehicle. For better illustration, we convert the value of
spatial coordinates from w to w:
Prediction of merging potential
IVTs of mainline vehicles and onramp vehicles can be
used to predict their merging potential based on the
relationship between them. If the IVTs intersect with
each other within the merging area, it is inferred that
the two vehicles potentially reach the intersection at
the same time when their trips follow the lane speed
profile. According to the prediction, we can find the
mainline-onramp vehicle pair which has high possibil-
ity to naturally merge without any additional cotnrols.
The way to check the intersection of IVTs follows the
steps below:
Step 1 Check Potential Intersections: An IVT can be
piecewise separated to linear segments Segi 2 IVT by
its guide spots. Given any two segments:

Segr ¼ ðGr , Grþ1 Þ
Where Gm and Gmþ1 are the endpoints of Segm ; Gr
and Grþ1 are the endpoints of Segr ; Gm , Gmþ1 2 IVTm ,
Gr , Grþ1 2 IVTr : The coordinates of these points can
be described like:
Gi ¼ ðsi , Wi Þ
Because the segments are a part of the
trajectory which is monotonically increasing, we
assume that:
8
>
> sm < smþ1
<
Wm < Wmþ1
(11)
>
> s < srþ1
: r
Wr < Wrþ1
The two segments can be screened by whether
it is possible to have an intersecting point exactly
on either of them instead of on their extension
line. We apply an equation set to check the
possibility:

8 1
>
> f ¼ ðWm  Wmþ1 Þ  sr þ ðsmþ1  sm Þ  Wr þ sm  Wmþ1  Wm  smþ1
>
>
< f 2 ¼ ðWm  Wmþ1 Þ  srþ1 þ ðsmþ1  sm Þ  Wrþ1 þ sm  Wmþ1  Wm  smþ1
f 3 ¼ ðWr  Wrþ1 Þ  sm þ ðsrþ1  sr Þ  Wm þ sr  Wrþ1  Wr  srþ1
>
>
>
> f ¼ ðWr  Wrþ1 Þ  smþ1 þ ðsrþ1  sr Þ  Wmþ1 þ sr  Wrþ1  Wr  srþ1
4
:
f 1  f 2 > 0 or f 3  f 4 > 0
This equation set is used to check whether both
two endpoints of a segment are on the same side of
another segment. If the equation set (12) holds, it is
impossible to have an intersection on either of the
segments, and we ignore this pair.
Step 2 Identify Parallel or Overlapping IVT
Segments: After passing the screening test in Step 1,
the two segments also need to be judged for a paral-
lel relationship. The criterion is written as follows:
   
wmþ1  wm ðsrþ1  sr Þ ¼ wrþ1  wr ðsmþ1  sm Þ
(13)
If the equation holds, we can judge that the two seg-
ments are parallel or overlapped, then we check
whether they are overlapped by the following condi-
tion.
 
smþ1 wm  sm wmþ1 ðsrþ1  sr Þ
 
¼ srþ1 wr  sr wrþ1 ðsmþ1  sm Þ (14)
If Equation (14) holds and overlapping segments
are identified, then the entire overlapping area is safe
for merging; otherwise, two IVTs are paralleled with-
out any intersecting points exist.
Step 3 Determine Intersection Points:
Find the overlapping points by solving the follow-
ing equation-set to find the intersection coordinates
sm and wm
(   (17)
ðs  sm Þ  w  mþ1  wm  ¼ ðw  wm Þ  ðsmþ1  sm Þ
ðs  sr Þ  wrþ1  wr ¼ ðw  wr Þ  ðsrþ1  sr Þ
(15)
If the solution ðsint , wint Þ for the Equation (15)
exists, then the intersection point is where the onramp
vehicle is safe to merge.
DMA vehicle-gap pairing
Pairing an onramp vehicle with a gap in mainline
requires the evaluation of the relationship among the
JOURNAL OF INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS 7
(12)
IVTs of two consecutive mainline vehicles (Putative
Leader (Pl ) and Putative Follower (Pf ) of a gap) and the
IVT of an onramp vehicle r: To ensure safety, the tra-
jectories of Pl and Pf need to be shifted backward and
forward for a safe distance dsafe before further analysis.
There are three pairing scenarios to be considered.

Scenario 1: The IVTr intersects both two consecu-
tive IVT s within the merging area. The two IVTs
are marked as IVTPl and TPf : In this scenario,
there should be sufficient spacing between IVTPl
and IVTPf to allow the safe merging. Figure 5
shows a schematic of the scenario, in which the
dashed line shows the speed synchronization pro-
cess with Pl and the round dot is the velocity-
synchronized position. Firstly, we can calculate the
minimum time that vehicle r takes to synchronize
its speed with Pl :
ðupm  ur Þ
Dt ¼ (16)
Armax
where ur , upm are the velocities of r and Pm (Pl or Pf )
when r firstly meets Pl (accelerating merge) or Pf
(decelerating merge), respectively, Armax ¼ 1:5 m=s2 if
accelerating merge, and Armaxdec ¼ 4 m=s2 : The
required accelerate/decelerate distance is calculated by
following kinematic equations.
8
>
< ur  Dt þ 0:5  Armaxdec  Dt  upf
2
>
 Dt  dsafe ðArmax ¼ 4Þ
TL1 ¼
>
> Lplpf þ ur  Dt þ 0:5  Armax
:  Dt2  upf  Dt  dsafe ðArmax ¼ 1:5Þ
For a successful pairing, the following criterion shall
be checked:
TL1 > Lr (18)
In which, upf is the velocity of Pf when r initially
meets the gap; Lplpf is the distance between
Pl and Pf initially meet; Lr is the length of r:

Scenario 2: If IVTr intersects with only one IVT.
We mark this vehicle as Pl : If the intersection is
8 X. JIANG ET AL.
Figure 5. Instantaneous virtual trajectory-based vehicle-gap pairing.
far away enough from the end of the auxiliary lane,
this is also an eligible pair. The checking criteria are
TL2 ¼ L0  wint > Lr (19)
where L0 is the length of athe cceleration lane.

Scenario 3: If r cannot find any intersections with
any mainline vehicles, and the gap between two
closest upstream and downstream mainline vehicle
IVTs are large enough. It means that the merging
section is quite clear during merging. We still
mark the closest upstream vehicle as Pf , then the
condition becomes
TL3 ¼ w'pf  dsafe > Lr (20)
In which w0pf is the remaining distance of Pf
toward the end of acceleration lane when Pl reaches
the end of the acceleration lane.
DMA vehicle-gap pairing refreshing
r, Pl , and Pf are locked during each message control
cycle (1 s in our study). At the end of each cycle, the
vehicle-gap pairs are re-checked for validity. If the vehicle-
gap pair is still valid, the estimated merging position is
updated; Otherwise, they are unpaired and released for
pairing again in the future. The validity of the vehicle-gap
pair is determined by the following conditions.

Estimated Merging Position Eligibility: The
updated expected merging position should still
locate within the merging section;

Mainline Vehicle Availability: If Pl or Pf made
lane changes to inner lanes, then the vehicle-gap
pair is unlocked.
Gap maintaining by mainline vehicles
To ensure the gap between Pf and Pl is taken by r,
Pf needs to be controlled to open and maintain the
gap for r with two control objectives. First, Pf needs
to open and maintain a gap with respect to Pl : Then
during the gap approaching by r, Pf also need to
adjust the speed to yield the gap to r:

Component 1- Gap Opening: To open up the gap,
Pf is provided with dynamic speed guidance or
ACC acceleration signals. We use the template
of the popular linear ACC model to generate
guidance signals
 
a 0pf ðt þ Dt Þ ¼ K0 apf ðtÞ þ K1 upl ðtÞ  upf ðt Þ
þ K2 ðwpf  wpl  lpl  Ld Þ (21)
u 0pf ðt þ DtÞ ¼ upf ðt Þ þ a pf ðt þ Dt ÞDt
Where a 0k ðt þ Dt Þ(u 0k ðt þ DtÞ) and ak ðtÞ (uk ðt Þ)
are the guidance and prevailing acceleration
(velocity) of vehicle k, respectively, lpl is the length
of Pl , Ld ¼ 7 (m) is the desired space distance
which is tuned based on trial simulation runs
slightly larger than the length of an average
passenger vehicle; k0 , k1 , and k2 are model’s
design constants.
 JOURNAL OF INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS 9

Component 2- Merging Yielding: To yield to r, where amax

r is the maximum desired acceleration rate
Pf also needs to be adopt a popular ACC of onramp vehicle (m/s2), Dt is the driver’s reaction
model proposed in Davis (2007) albeit the time (s); Ui is the desired speed (m/s) on link i which
targeted vehicle is the paired ramp merging is a preset parameter for each link, b is the actual
one but not necessary the vehicle physically maximum deceleration of the vehicle, b0 is the esti-
near Pf : mated maximum deceleration the preceding vehicle is
  willing to employ, lPr is the length of Pr : All parame-
u 00pf ðt þ DtÞ ¼ K00 wpf  wr  Ld
ters are calibrated in advance.
þ K10 ður ðtÞ  upf ðtÞÞ (22)

Gap Approaching Signal: To approach the gap, a
a 00pf ðt þ Dt Þ ¼ ðu00pf ðt þ Dt Þ  upf ðtÞÞ=Dt (23) bi-directional ACC is proposed to coordinate the
relative position of Pr with Pl and Pf : The detailed
where K00 , K10 are designed constant. formulation is as follows.

Gap Control Signal: The gap control guidance is    
1
then generated by applying weights to the above u Pr l ðt þ Dt Þ ¼  wr  wPl  Lm d þ Dt uPl ðt Þ  ur ðt Þ
 hpl
two components as the following. Pf 1  
u r ðt þ DtÞ ¼  wr  wPf þ Lm d þ Dt uPf ðt Þ  ur ðt Þ
u pf ðt þ DtÞ ¼ au 0pf ðt þ Dt Þ þ ð1  aÞu 00pf ðt þ DtÞ hpf
P P
wpf  wmerge u approach
r ðt þ DtÞ ¼ kPr l u Pr l ðt þ DtÞ þ kr f u r f ðt þ Dt Þ
While a ¼ approach ð
ar t þ DtÞ ¼ ðu r approach ðt þ DtÞ  ur ðtÞÞ=Dt
LCV  wmerge
(26)
(24)
where LCV is the total length of control area including where u approach ðt þ DtÞ is the approaching velocity sig-
r
acceleration lane and other upstream links covered by P
nal for r, u Pr l and u r f are respectively the gap-
CV network, wmerge is the distance from estimated merg- approaching velocity signal component with respect to
ing location to the end of the acceleration lane, and the Pl and Pf , LM d ¼ 3:5 m is the minimum desired
weight of the two components a is determined by wPf merging gap, hPl , hPf are the time headways from r to
following the suggestion in Davis (2007). It is worth P
Pl and Pf , respectively, kPr l , kr f are the weights of two
noting that the guidance speed is constrained in components both set to 0.5 in this research .
a reasonable range which shall not be negative nor crash The combined crash-avoidance and gap-
into the preceding car. approaching guidance signals are given as follows.
 approach
a ðt þ DtÞ
Gap approaching by onramp vehicle a r ðt þ Dt Þ ¼ min r max (27)
Gap approaching algorithms consist of both the a r ðt þ DtÞ
crash avoidance with Plr and the gap approaching u r ðt þ DtÞ ¼ ur ðtÞ þ a r ðt þ DtÞDt (28)
toward the targeted gap. The actual approaching
speed/acceleration signals are determined by first
ensuring crash avoidance and then approaching Experimental design
the gap.
Site description

Crash Avoidance Signal: Gipps model is used for The proposed method is evaluated with VISSIM traffic
Pr to following its preceding ramp vehicle. simulation. A baseline VISSIM model was built and

8 9
>  sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi >
>
> ur tð Þ ur tð Þ >
>
>
< ur ðt Þ þ 2:5ar Dt 1  0:025 þ >
=
u r ðt þ Dt Þ ¼ min U i U i
> rffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
n o> (25)
>
> bDt þ b2 Dt 2 þ b 2 w ðt Þ  l  L  w ðtÞ  u ðt ÞDt þ ðu ðt Þ2 Þ=b' > >
>
: r rl d rl r rl >
;
 
r ðt þ Dt Þ ¼ u r ðt þ Dt Þ  ur ðt Þ =Dt
amax
10 X. JIANG ET AL.
Figure 6. Experiment site and baseline traffic profile.
calibrated with field data collected between 7 am and 9 am
on April 11th, 2012 at the IH-35 corridor in Austin,
Texas. The whole road network under study is straight
northbound and has a westward curve at the end before a
river crossing. There are four entry ramps along the main-
line of the highway. We chose the on-ramp at Woodland
Avenue which is near the end of the corridor segment for
the implementation of our method. The selected location
is a weaving section which has an on-ramp and an off-
ramp. The corridor has congested bottleneck during
morning peak hours which is a persistent traffic issue in
Austin due to the heavy commuting traffic toward the
downtown downstream across the river.
As illustrated in Figure 6, the congestion starts after
a warm-up period for 15 minutes and lasts for
35 minutes; then the traffic falls to a release period
with the free-flow condition. The average link velocity
during congestion is around 15 MPH (24 km/h) while
the velocity in freeflow condition is around 45 MPH
(72 km/h). The peak of mainline flowrate reaches
about 5200 VPH at the 5th minute of simulation and
gradually falls to 4000 VPH, while the onramp flow-
rate increases to about 700 VPH at the 15th minute
and keeps oscillating between 780 and 550 VPH till
the end of the period.
Simulation model building and calibration
To ensure the baseline model is consistent with the
field data, a VISSIM simulation model is built and
calibrated based on the field traffic flow data. We con-
figure the entry rate, desired speed, and path split rate
in simulation to make the flow rates in mainline and
ramp close to the observed field data. As shown in
Figure 7, the discrepancy between the simulated flow
rate and observed flow data is less than 10%.
Simulation configuration
Simulation framework
The proposed model is implemented by the External
Driver Model (EDM) Application Programing
Interface (API) of VISSIM. The default lane-changing
models are retained given that the proposed method
only triggers lane-changing alerts. The resolution is
set as 0.1 s/step for complete sensing. We update
vehicle-control for the proposed CV-DMA every 1 s
(10 steps) considering the perception-reaction time.
The vehicles are simulated as manually controlled so
that drivers keep smooth speed-changing during per-
ception-reaction interval after the vehicles receive
speed guidance signal. The compliance rate is assumed

100% in this simulation. Other model parameters are
shown in Appendix Table A1.
The constant parameters for the ACC model are
the suggested value in the report by Steven et al.
(Shladover, VanderWerf, Miller, Kourjanskaia, &
Krishnan, 2014). The Gipps model in this simulation
Figure 7. Comparison of field flow rate and simulation
flow rate.
Figure 8. Travel time measurement route.
JOURNAL OF INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS 11
applies a set of calibrated parameter which is from the
authors’ previous work (Jin, Yang, & Ran, 2014).
Performance measurements
Performance measurements considered in this study
(1) travel time of onramp vehicles and mainline
vehicles throughout the weaving section; (2) the time
to collision (TTC) during lane changing. In the travel
time evaluation, all vehicles passing through the merg-
ing area are considered. The measured path for on-
ramp vehicles includes the entry frontage road and
the acceleration lane. The measured path for mainline
vehicles includes the mainline merging link and its
upstream link. The travel time is measured on the
route shown in Figure 8.
TTC is counted only when the velocity of the
merging vehicle is slower than the following mainline
vehicle. The following equation is applied to calculate
TTC:
wPr  wPl
TTC ¼ (28)
uPr  uPl
In TTC evaluation, we only calculate the TTC
between the mainline lagging vehicle and on-ramp
vehicle during the merging process because only these
vehicles are under controlled and their TTCs are
changed by our model.
The performance during the whole period as well
as the performance during congestion are analyzed.
Two representative DMA algorithms from Park et al.’s
and Davis et al.’s works are also implemented for the
model comparison.
Simulation results
We conducted a baseline simulation and a simulation
with CV-DMA method applied. The baseline simula-
tion takes about 15 minutes for a 1-hour period. The
simulation with the CV-DMA method applied takes
12 X. JIANG ET AL.
Figure 9. Examples of trajectories of mainline and merging vehicles under DMA.
about 45 minutes for a 1-hour period. The additional
30 minutes of the latter simulation may caused by the
extra processing time. We also reproduced the two
referenced models (all parameters remain the same) in
the same environment with VISSIM EDM and then
analyzed their features and control patterns.
The overall vehicle-gap pairing success rate is
around 97.31%, which means the proposed method
can assist most participating merging vehicles. The
main simulation results are demonstrated in
Appendix Table A2. All results are the average value
of 30 simulation runs with different random seeds. As
illustrated in Figure 9, the proposed algorithm CV-
DMA can significantly reduce the stop-and-go waves
triggered by the gap seeking, yielding, or competing
behavior between mainline and ramp vehicles. This is
achieved by (1) ensuring sufficient gaps are yielded by
paired mainline vehicles and (2) continuous and
dynamic synchronization among paired vehicles for
smooth “gear-like” merging. Such efficiency improve-
ment in merging can lead to reduced travel time and
improved safety due to smoothed merging traffic flow.
Mobility impact: Appendix Table A2 and Figure
10 illustrate significant travel time saving and conges-
tion reduction for both the entire and congested
period. Davis model has the best performance
between reference algorithms. However, both refer-
ence models have limited performance in mainline or

Figure 10. Travel time evaluation results.
during the off-peak period. As a contrast, the pro-
posed CV-DMA algorithm has a remarkable perform-
ance on both mainline and ramp, especially during
peak hours, and it has a relatively light impact on off-
peak traffic. Meanwhile, Figure 11 shows the link
evaluation results of the CV-DMA method. The
results illustrate that the CV-DMA model leads to a
higher speed and lower density on both mainline and
ramp. It indicates that the proposed model can
smooth the traffic and prompt the merging process.
The increase of flow rate in early stage indicates the
potential of CV-DMA model to increase the road cap-
acity. The reason why the flow rate in mainline and
ramp changes little in the later stage is primarily that
the congestion in this bottleneck is caused by the
merging conflicts instead of over-saturated traffic.
Safety impact: The safety effect of DMA algo-
rithms is evaluated based on the distribution of gap
sizes and TTCs at the time of merging. According to
the histograms shown in Figure 12, it is observed
that the distribution of gaps with the length of about
15–40 m remarkably increases after DMA system is
applied. The reduction in small gaps and low TTCs
indicates a safe and efficient merging. Meanwhile, in
Park et al.’s model, the merging gap is opened by
advising the mainline traffic to change lanes. Thus,
the gap size and TTC are slightly larger but at the
cost of medium mobility improvement. In Davis
JOURNAL OF INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS 13
et al.’s model, the onramp vehicles may merge into
gaps which are shorter or slower. It does not neces-
sarily mean the Davis model is unsafe because it
assumes a highly automated environment. However,
the smaller gap and shorter TTC may lead to a
higher risk for human operators and a stricter
requirement for system delay/stability. In the pro-
posed CV-DMA model, onramp vehicle’s trajectory
is smoother, and the speed is more stable. In the sta-
tistics level, the V2I DMA’s gap size is large while
mainline traffic is less influenced and fluctuated. The
variations of speed and acceleration in Appendix
Table A3 also illustrate the conclusion. Due to the
implementation of control algorithms, all the three
models’ acceleration jerk aggravate. However, Davis’
model has the most severe variations on acceleration,
while CV-DMA and Park’s model has similarly bet-
ter performance. Meanwhile, CV-DMA outperforms
in small speed variation which indicates a smoother
trajectory in a merging process.
Congestion pattern: The speed of contour maps
in Figure 13 further illustrate the performance of
the proposed CV-DMA algorithm. The range of
acceleration lane is indicated by two black lines in
the figure. The indicated “congested area” in the fig-
ures is the spatial-temporal area where link speed is
less than 35 km/h. CV-DMA can reduce significant
overall congestion on both mainline and ramp.
14 X. JIANG ET AL.
Figure 11. Link evaluation results.
Although Davis model has the best performance for
ramp traffic, it is at the cost of congestion
in mainline.
Sensitivity analysis on perception-reaction
time (PRT)
Different level of human perception-reaction time
(PRT) is applied in the proposed CV-DMA method to
test the impact of different PRT on the model’s per-
formance. We choose the PRT from a reasonably small
value (0.8 s) to a large PRT (4 s) which may indicate a
distracted driver. The travel time and TTC are eval-
uated to represent mobility and safety performance.
Appendix Table A4 and Figure 14 illustrate that
the proposed algorithm still has similar mobility and
safety performance if the PRT is within 2 s. With
increased PRT to 3 s or 4 s, the mainline mobility per-
formance improves while the ramp performance dete-
riorates. The safety performance in terms of TTC also
deteriorates slightly with increased shorter TTCs.
Overall, the deterioration in average travel time and
TTC for 3 s and 4 s are essentially less than 15%.
However, the performance still improves as compared
with the baseline condition.

Figure 12. Gap size and TTC distribution evaluation results.
Conclusion and future work
This study presents a CV V2I-based dynamic merge
assistance (DMA) method based on the IVTs. The
proposed system can be implemented at freeway
merging sections to improve the merging efficiency
and safety performance, especially in a congested
condition. The proposed model is simulated by using
VISSIM External Driver Model. A baseline model is
built based on the field data collected on the IH-35
corridor in Austin, TX. The proposed DMA system
is simulated at a weaving section by assuming full
trajectory observation and 100% CV penetration. The
evaluation results show a promising performance: (1)
the proposed DMA system can significantly enhance
the traffic efficiency, especially during peak hours; (2)
the system also increases the minimum and average
TTC during the merging process which indicates
significantly enhanced safety. Comparisons between
the proposed model and two models from Park et al.
and Davis et al.’s research also illustrate the superior
performance of the proposed CV-DMA algorithm.
Future work in this study includes several key
aspects. First, the parameters applied in the
car-following model and ACC model can be further
calibrated and optimized. String stability analysis is
JOURNAL OF INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS 15
also necessary for ACC algorithm design. The pro-
posed CV-DMA method applies a bi-directional ACC
control model for on-ramp vehicles and applies a
combined traditional ACC control model for mainline
vehicles. In this case, the proposed bi-directional ACC
model is also a combination of two traditional ACC
models aiming at the preceding mainline vehicle and
following vehicle respectively. We adopt the parame-
ters from exiting researches (Davis, 2007; Shladover
et al., 2001), which are assumed as string-stable mod-
els. In future research, we will conduct a detailed ana-
lysis of the model parameters and its string stability.
Second, the proposed algorithms need to be adjusted
toward the mixed vehicular environment with nonpar-
ticipating manual vehicles, connected, and connected
automated vehicles. Third, the system also needs to
consider the implementation of DSRC or Cellular
based V2I hardware system and in-vehicle mobile
applications so that more realistic field tests can be
conducted. In a field experiment, the human factors
and driver reception aspects can be explored as well.
Funding
The research was partially supported by NSFC under Grant
No. 61620106002.
16 X. JIANG ET AL.

Figure 13. Speed contour map for the simulation.


Figure 14. Mobility and safety performance for different perception-reaction time (PRT) levels.
ORCID
Peter J. Jin http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7688-3730
References
Buhr, J. H., Radke, M., Kirk, B., & Drew, D. (1969). A mov-
ing vehicle merging control system. Highway Research
Record, 279.
Davis, L. (2007). Effect of adaptive cruise control systems
on mixed traffic flow near an on-ramp. Physica A:
Statistical Mechanics and Its Applications, 379(1),
274–290. doi:10.1016/j.physa.2006.12.017
Hayat, M. T., Park, H., & Smith, B. L. (2014). Connected
vehicle enabled freeway merge assistance system-field
test: Preliminary results of driver compliance to advisory.
Paper presented at the Intelligent Vehicles Symposium
Proceedings, 2014 IEEE.
Jiang, X., Jin, P. J., Wan, X., & Wang, Y. (2017). A V2I
(Vehicle-to-Infrastructure) based Dynamic Merge Assistance
Method based on Instantaneous Virtual Trajectories: A
Microscopic Implementation of Gap Metering. TRB 96th
Annual Meeting Compendium of Papers (No. 17-06326).
Jin, P. J., Fang, J., Jiang, X., DeGaspari, M., & Walton,
C. M. (2017). Gap metering for active traffic control at
freeway merging sections. Journal of Intelligent
Transportation Systems, 21(1), 1–11. doi:10.1080/
15472450.2016.1157021
JOURNAL OF INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS 17
Jin, P. J., Yang, D., & Ran, B. (2014). Reducing the error
accumulation in car-following models calibrated with
vehicle trajectory data. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent
Transportation Systems, 15(1), 148–157. doi:10.1109/TITS.
2013.2273872
Kachroo, P., & Li, Z. (1997). Vehicle merging control design
for an automated highway system. Paper presented at the
Intelligent Transportation System (pp. 224–229). IEEE.
Klee, H. (1973). An Algorithm for Synchronizing Entrance
Ramp Vehicles mi Freeway Gaps. Journal of Dynamic
Systems Measurement and Control, 95(2), 204–212.
Klee, H. (1981). Gap stability and freeway merging.
Computers & Industrial Engineering, 5(2), 113–125. doi:
10.1016/0360-8352(81)90019-X
Letter, C., & Elefteriadou, L. (2017). Efficient control of
fully automated connected vehicles at freeway merge seg-
ments. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging
Technologies, 80(Supplement C), 190–205. doi:. doi:10.
1016/j.trc.2017.04.015
Lu, X.-Y., Tan, H.-S., Shladover, S. E., & Hedrick, J. K.
(2004). Automated vehicle merging maneuver implemen-
tation for AHS. Vehicle System Dynamics, 41(2), 85–107.
doi:10.1076/vesd.41.2.85.26497
Marinescu, D., Curn,
J., Bouroche, M., & Cahill, V. I
(2012). On-ramp traffic merging using cooperative intelli-
gent vehicles: A slot-based approach. Paper presented at
the Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITSC);
18 X. JIANG ET AL.
Anchorage, AK, 2012 15th International IEEE
Conference pp. 900-906. doi:10.1109/ITSC.2012.6338779.


Marinescu, D., Curn, J., Slot, M., Bouroche, M., & Cahill,
V. (2010). An active approach to guaranteed arrival times
based on traffic shaping. Paper presented at the
Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITSC), 2010 13th
International IEEE Conference.
Milanes, V., Godoy, J., Villagra, J., & Perez, J. (2011).
Automated on-ramp merging system for congested traffic
situations. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation
Systems, 12(2), 500–508. doi:10.1109/TITS.2010.2096812
Mirshahi, M., Obenberger, J. T., Fuhs, C. A., Howard, C. E.,
Krammes, R. A., Kuhn, B. T., … Yung, J. L. (2007). Active
traffic management: The next step in congestion manage-
ment. (No. FHWA-PL-07-012; NTIS-PB2008100599).
United States, USA: Federal Highway Administration
Park, H., Bhamidipati, C., & Smith, B. (2011). Development and
evaluation of enhanced intellidrive-enabled lane changing
advisory algorithm to address freeway merge conflict.
Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation
Research Board, 2243(1), 146–157. doi:10.3141/2243-17
Park, H., Su, S., Hayat, M. T., & Smith, B. L. (2014). A
Prototype Freeway Merging Control Algorithm Under a
Connected Vehicle Environment. Paper presented at the
Transportation Research Board 93rd Annual Meeting.
Ran, B., Leight, S., & Chang, B. (1999). A microscopic
simulation model for merging control on a dedicated-
lane automated highway system. Transportation Research
Part C: Emerging Technologies, 7(6), 369–388. doi:10.
1016/S0968-090X(99)00028-5
Rios-Torres, J., & Malikopoulos, A. A. (2017a). Automated
and cooperative vehicle merging at highway on-ramps.
IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems,
18(4), 780–789. doi:10.1109/TITS.2016.2587582
Rios-Torres, J., & Malikopoulos, A. A. (2017b). A survey on
the coordination of connected and automated vehicles at
intersections and merging at highway on-ramps. IEEE
Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems, 18(5),
1066–1077. doi:10.1109/TITS.2016.2600504
Scarinci, R., & Heydecker, B. (2014). Control concepts for
facilitating motorway on-ramp merging using intelligent
vehicles. Transport Reviews, 34(6), 775–797. doi:10.1080/
01441647.2014.983210
Scarinci, R., Heydecker, B., & Hegyi, A. (2015). Analysis of
traffic performance of a merging assistant strategy using
cooperative vehicles. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent
Transportation Systems, 16(4), 2094–2103. doi:10.1109/
TITS.2015.2394772
Shladover, S., VanderWerf, J., Miller, M. A., Kourjanskaia,
N., & Krishnan, H. (2014). Development and performance
evaluation of AVCSS deployment sequences to advance
from today’s driving environment to full automation
(Final Report for MOU 366 UCB-ITS-PRR-2001-18).
California, CA.
Tignor, S. C. (1975). Operational analyses of freeway mov-
ing-merge systems. Transportation Research Record, 533,
1–21.
True, J., & Rosen, D. (1973). Moving Merge–A New
Concept in Ramp Control. Public Roads, 37(7) 229–245.
Xie, Y., Zhang, H., Gartner, N. H., & Arsava, T. (2017).
Collaborative merging strategy for freeway ramp opera-
tions in a connected and autonomous vehicles environ-
ment. Journal of Intelligent Transportation Systems,
21(2), 136–147. doi:10.1080/15472450.2016.1248288
Zhou, M., Qu, X., & Jin, S. (2017). On the impact of
cooperative autonomous vehicles in improving freeway
merging: A modified intelligent driver model-based
approach. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation
Systems, 18(6), 1422–1428.
 JOURNAL OF INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS 19

Appendix

Table A1. Simulation model parameters in CV-DMA.

VISSIM Simulation
Desired Speed for Car 96 km/h Maximum Acceleration 3.5 m/s2
Desired Speed for HGV 80 km/h Maximum Deceleration 7.5 m/s2
Relative Flow of Car 89.5% Headway Time 0.93 s
Relative Flow of HGV 10.5% Minimum Security Gap 0.5 m
Off-Ramp Proportion 7.5% Standstill Headway 1.52–2 m
Gipps Model ACC Model
2
Max Acceleration (m/s ) 2.90 K0 1
Max Deceleration (m/s2) 1.82 K1 0.3
Assumed Max Deceleration of Preceding Car (m/s2) 1.82 K2 0.7
Desired Speed (m/s) 26.22 k00 0.7
Safe Distance (m) 1.21 k10 0.7
Varies with current velocity.
0.7 multiplied by control cycle resolution (1 s in this simulation).

Table A2. Average performance metrics from all and congested time intervals in 30 simulation runs (all units
are in seconds).
Original CV-DMA
Performance Metrics All period Congested period All period Congested Period
Average travel time (ramp) 82.5 129.5 63.36 68.1
Average travel time (mainline) 69.2 117.3 53.3 61.9
Minimum TTC 0.1 0.1 0.7 0.7
Average of under 85-Percentile TTC 16.9 16.7 32.6 33.5
85-Percentile TTC 34.3 30.4 63.7 65.3
Park et. al.’s Model Davis et al.’s Model
Performance Metrics All period Congested period All period Congested Period
Average travel time (ramp) 76.1 113.9 65.1 71.7
Average travel time (mainline) 68.8 116.9 99.7 115.8
Minimum TTC 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1
Average of under 85-Percentile TTC 20.4 21.4 11.7 12.8
85-Percentile TTC 37.5 41.7 23.8 25.3
Performance Metrics Gap Metering
All period Congested period
Average travel time (ramp) 70.1 91.9
Average travel time (mainline) 83.5 117.1
Minimum TTC 0.1 0.1
Average of under 85-Percentile TTC 19.2 20.1
85-Percentile TTC 36.3 36.3
Excluding extremely large TTCs.

Table A3. Variation of speed and acceleration during merging.

Scenario Variation of speed in mainline Variation of acceleration in mainline Variation of speed on ramp Variation of acceleration on ramp
Baseline 27.2 8.7 19.8 1.2
V2I-DMA 10.3 42.9 4.7 1.8
Park et al. 18.2 41.9 12.2 1.1
Davis 27.9 161.8 18.5 7.3
20 X. JIANG ET AL.

Table A4. Sensitivity analysis for perception-reaction time (all units are in seconds).
Perception-Reaction Time 0.8 Perception-Reaction Time 1s
Performance Metrics All period Congested period All period Congested Period
Average travel time (ramp) 63.1 67.5 63.36 68.1
Average travel time (mainline) 52.9 61.1 53.3 61.9
Minimum TTC 0.6 0.6 0.7 0.7
Average of under 85-Percentile TTC 37.5 36.1 32.6 33.5
85-Percentile TTC 75.4 73.3 63.7 65.3
Perception-Reaction Time 1.2 Perception-Reaction Time 2s
Performance Metrics All period Congested period All period Congested Period
Average travel time (ramp) 63.2 67.7 63.0 66.8
Average travel time (mainline) 52.7 60.2 51.6 57.0
Minimum TTC 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6
Average of under 85-Percentile TTC 33.3 30.3 28.6 28.1
85-Percentile TTC 65.0 57.0 56.8 54.9
Perception-Reaction Time 3s Perception-Reaction Time 4s
Performance Metrics All period Congested period All period Congested period
Average travel time (ramp) 63.2 67.9 65.2 71.5
Average travel time (mainline) 51.4 57.2 52.5 59.2
Minimum TTC 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6
Average of under 85-Percentile TTC 26.8 24.1 20.7 20.3
85-Percentile TTC 52.1 47.4 38.6 37.3
Excluding extremely large TTCs.