Int. J. Simulation and Process Modelling, Vol. 19, Nos.

1/2, 2022 71

A novel analytical model for estimating vehicle delay

at isolated signalised intersections

Feng Qiao*
School of Information and Control Engineering,
Shenyang Institute of Technology,
Fushun, 113122, China
and
Faculty of Information and Control Engineering,
Shenyang Jianzhu University,
Shenyang, 100168, China
Email: fengqiao@sjzu.edu.cn
*Corresponding author

Huixin Liu and Dan Luo

School of Information and Control Engineering,
Shenyang Institute of Technology,
Fushun, 113122, China
Email: 591667038@qq.com
Email: 1317344402@qq.com

Haochen Sun
School of Information Engineering,
Henan University of Science and Technology,
Luoyang, 471000, Henan, China
Email: hcsun1994@163.com

Yinong Chen
School of Computing, Informatics, and Decision Systems Engineering,
Arizona State University,
Tempe, AZ 85287-8809, USA
Email: yinong@asu.edu

Abstract: This paper proposes a novel analytical model to estimate the average vehicle delay at
signalised intersections under saturated or oversaturated conditions based on the investigation
and analysis of the existing methods to deal with the problems arising in the process of
acceleration, deceleration, and the transmissibility of the cycle-by-cycle average vehicle delay.
The proposed model employs and combines the operating and queuing characteristics of vehicles
to produce the analytic formula. To verify the effectiveness of the proposed model, simulation
experiments are conducted, and the error rates and the correlation coefficients are investigated,
which confirm that the proposed model possesses certain significant advantages over the existing
models in saturated and oversaturated conditions. The results of research work show that the
proposed model can provide transportation engineers or professionals with an effective tool for
analysing, timing and managing the saturated or oversaturated signalised intersections.

Keywords: signalised intersection; analytical model; vehicle delay; saturated condition;

oversaturated condition; operating characteristics.

Reference to this paper should be made as follows: Qiao, F., Liu, H., Luo, D., Sun, H. and
Chen, Y. (2022) ‘A novel analytical model for estimating vehicle delay at isolated signalised
intersections’, Int. J. Simulation and Process Modelling, Vol. 19, Nos. 1/2, pp.71–85.

Biographical notes: Feng Qiao received his Bachelor’s and Master’s degree from the
Northeastern University (NEU), Shenyang, China in 1982 and 1987, respectively; and PhD in
Intelligent Modelling and Control from the University of the West of England, UK in 2005.
During the period between 1987 and 2001, he worked at the Automation Research Institute of
Metallurgical Industry, Beijing, China, as a Senior Engineer in Electrical and Computer
Engineering. Currently, he is a Professor at the School of Information and Control Engineering,

Copyright © 2022 Inderscience Enterprises Ltd.

72 F. Qiao et al.

Shenyang Institute of Technology (SIT), Fushun, China, and Professor at the Faculty of
Information and Control Engineering, Shenyang Jianzhu University (SJZU), Shenyang, China.
His research interests include modelling and simulation, intelligent computation. He is the EiC of
the International Journal of Simulation and Process Modelling (IJSPM) and he serves on many
international conferences as IPC and OPC member.

Huixin Liu received his Bachelor’s in Machinery Manufacturing Process and Equipment in the
School of Mechanical Engineering, North University of China, Taiyuan, China in 1995, and
Master’s in Computer Science in the School of Information Science and Engineering, Shenyang
University of Technology, Shenyang, China in 2003. Currently, he is a Professor and the Dean of
the School of Information and Control Engineering, Shenyang Institute of Technology (SIT),
Fushun, China. His research interests include artificial intelligence, digital media technology,
modelling and simulation.

Dan Luo received her Bachelor’s in Automation and Master’s in Control Engineering from the
College of Information Science and Engineering, NEU, in 2012 and 2014, respectively. Since
2014, she has been working as a Lecturer and the Head of the Department of Automation in SIT.
Her main research interests are intelligent modelling and control, modelling and simulation in
traffic systems, and system optimisation.

Haochen Sun is currently a Doctoral candidate of Henan University of Science and Technology,
Luoyang, China, majoring in Control Theory and Control Engineering. He received his
Bachelor’s in Electrical Engineering and Automation from Beihua University, Jilin, China and
Master’s in Systems Engineering from SJZU in 2016 and 2019, respectively. His research
interests include modelling and simulation for complex systems, optimisation theory and
application, machine learning, artificial intelligence and energy management for hybrid electric
vehicles.

Yinong Chen received his PhD degree from the Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT),
Germany, in 1993. He did Postdoctoral pesearch at KIT and at LAAS-CNRS, France. From 1994
to 2000, he was a faculty member at Wits University at Johannesburg, South Africa. He joined
Arizona State University, USA, in 2001, and currently, he is a Principal Lecturer and Director of
IoT/Robotics Education Lab. His primary research interests are in service-oriented computing,
Robot as a Serve, Internet of Things, and computer science education. He is the EiC of Artificial
Intelligence and Technology, an Associate Editor of IJSPM, an area editor of the Elsevier
Journal Simulation Modeling Practice and Theory, and an Editorial Board Member of the
Journal of Systems & Software and the CAAI Transactions on Intelligence Technology.

This paper is a revised and expanded version of a paper entitled ‘GAPSO-based traffic signal
control in isolated intersection with multiple objectives’ presented at ISSPM 2020 – The Second
International Symposium on Simulation and Process Modelling, Shenyang, China, 29–30 August
2020.

1 Introduction intersection move instantaneously: as the light turns to

green, the vehicles move with desired flow rate
Vehicle delay is one of the most important factors used in
immediately; and as the light turns to red, the vehicles stop
transportation engineering by scientists, researchers and
momentarily, neglecting the acceleration and deceleration
engineers in evaluating the performance of a signalised
processes. Such an assumption gives a favour for
intersection. It is a key consideration in determining the
simplifying the complex flow condition at the beginning of
Level of Service (LoS) at an intersection due to its direct
green light and at the end of green (or amber) light. This is a
relationship to the time cost of vehicles crossing the
well-known problem that has drawn attentions of many
intersection. Nevertheless, it is not easy to estimate the
researchers (Chen et al., 1993, 2021; Chen and Luca, 2018;
delay due to the randomness of the vehicle arrival and
Qiao et al., 2018; Sun et al., 2019; Capelle and Pinnell,
departure processes at a signalised intersection. Normally, it
1961; Greenshields et al., 1947; Luo et al., 2019).
is difficult to obtain the data of the vehicle delay manually
With the rapid growth of the number of vehicles in
and certain specialised detection devices have to be used to
urban areas, saturated or oversaturated situations occur
measure the delay. The cost of installation and maintenance
more and more frequently. The traditional vehicle delay
for these devices are too high for them to be widely used.
estimation models, which are effective for an undersaturated
So, an available and efficient model is required for traffic
condition, are no longer suitable for the situation of
professionals. Many studies have been conducted to
saturated or oversaturated conditions. Therefore, some
estimate the vehicle delay by analytical formula or models,
researchers come to study the estimation methods for delay
among which it is generally assumed that the vehicles at the
at intersections in a saturated condition (Dion et al., 2004;
 A novel analytical model for estimating vehicle delay at isolated signalised intersections
Abu-Lebdeh and Benekohal, 2003; Akçelik and Rouphail,
1993; Benekohal and Kim, 2005). Though these methods
provide some reasonable theoretical basis, there are still
some deficiencies: for example, in an oversaturated
condition, the occurrence of spillback is predictable and
probable, because of taking no account of the length of
lanes which will have some effects on the estimation of
vehicle delay (Chen et al., 2013; Luo et al., 2019).
In this research, the literature survey was investigated
for the history and background of the average vehicle delay,
as well as some key concepts. Some representative models
are illustrated, such as, the Webster model (Webster, 1958),
the HCM model (HCM, Washington, 2000) and the Akçelik
model (Akçelik, 1981), which are extensively used by
transportation engineers and managers. In this paper, the
operation based delay models are theoretically investigated.
Based on the operating characteristics, we propose an
improved vehicle delay model at isolated signalised
intersections for saturated and oversaturated traffic
conditions to evaluate the performance of the intersections
more precisely. Numerical experiments are conducted for
the duration within 5-cycle. The comparison of the
experimental results shows that the proposed model
possesses a strong ability to catch the actual situation,
especially in saturated and oversaturated traffic conditions.
To further ensure the validity and efficiency of the new
model, the error rates and the correlation coefficients among
the investigated models are computed and compared. It is
shown that the proposed model has higher precision and
accuracy than the existing delay models.
The remaining part of this paper is organised as follows:
In Section 2, the background of vehicle delay and three
representative estimation methods are summarised. In
Section 3, a basic estimation model based on vehicle
operating characteristics for an intersection in
oversaturation condition is analysed theoretically, and then
an improved method is presented based on the operation
characteristics. In Section 4, numerical experiments are
carried out on MATLAB and VISSIM at an isolated
signalised intersection to show the validity of the proposed
model, and the results are analysed. To find some further
evidence to support the proposed model, the error rates and
correlation coefficients are used, and the results are shown
in Section 5. Some conclusions are drawn in Section 6.
2 A historical perspective of delay models
The ideal condition of a vehicle crossing the signalised
intersection should be as follows: In case the signal is green,
all of the vehicles pass the STOP line with saturation flow
rate constantly until the signal turns red. As the signal turns
to red, the vehicles stop abruptly. However, in reality, at the
beginning of the green interval, it can be easily seen that the
vehicles in the front of the queue have to take more time,
named as the acceleration delay, to pass the STOP line than
the proceeding vehicles, and the time spent on the vehicle
passing the line will be approximately stable when the
vehicle flow reach saturation headway after some point.
73
In a saturated condition, as the signal turns amber, the
vehicles which have already passed the STOP line will keep
on moving, while the vehicles which have not passed the
line must decelerate and stop, named as the deceleration
delay.
2.1 The background of vehicle delay
Vehicle delay at a signalised intersection is obtained by the
difference between the departure time and the arrival time
of a single-vehicle. In other words, it can also be considered
to be equal to the total extra time spent on a single-vehicle
at the investigated intersection than the optimal time that the
vehicle requires if it is allowed to cross the intersection
without any delay.
The most commonly used index of the LoS of an
isolated signalised intersection is the delay, although some
other indexes are also used for evaluating the efficiency of
an intersection, such as queue length and stop times. As it is
possible to measure the on-site delay, it is a difficult and
complex process, especially in a large and complicated
intersection, and due to some subjective or objective
reasons, different observers may yield different results.
Thus, it requires some more efficient predictive models to
estimate the delay. The most commonly used measures of
delay are defined as follows:
• stopped time delay
• approach delay
• travel time delay.
In this paper, the operation conditions of the vehicle are
considered, which include three parts: deceleration, stop and
acceleration, which are slightly different from the
aforementioned three measures and thus require a new
analytical model. The deceleration delay is the additional
time that the approaching vehicle slows down to reach the
STOP line, when the signal turns red or amber, assuming
there is a queue that is moving when the signal is green. The
stopped delay is the time that the vehicle spends at the
intersection as it is in a queue that is stopped and waiting for
the signal to turn green. These two measures are the same as
the aforementioned measures that are commonly used. The
acceleration delay is the time spent on the vehicle
accelerating to the desired speed from stop. This measure is
different from the travel time used in the traditional
measure. At a signalised intersection, most of the vehicle
delay is directly caused by the traffic signal operation, and a
non-negligible part of the total vehicle delay is due to the
time needed by the drivers to react to the changes in the
signal display, mechanical constraints, and driver behaviour.
These three kinds of vehicle delay can be illustrated in
Figure 1.
In Figure 1, it can be clearly seen the deceleration delay,
stopped delay and acceleration delay for a single-vehicle
traversing a signalised intersection. OH is the desired path
of the vehicle; l represents the distance that the vehicle
moves within a time interval tc, which is given by tc = l / Vc;
74 F. Qiao et al.

d is the total delay of a single-vehicle; t is the time spent on
the vehicle along the actual path OACDFG; la and ld
represent the moving distance during the acceleration and
deceleration, respectively; dd, ds and da represent the delay
time during the deceleration, stop and acceleration,
respectively. Note that the desired path is the path when the
vehicle travels with a preferred speed Vc and without any
hindrance, and the actual path is the path including
deceleration, stop and acceleration.
height of the rectangle (by the dashed line) represents the
saturation flow rate, and its width represents the effective
green time. It is obvious that the actual green interval and
the effective green interval are not the same. The beginning
of the effective green interval lags behind the beginning of
the actual green interval. This lag time is called ‘start loss’,
and, similarly, the end of effective green lags behind the end
of the actual green, this lag time called ‘compensation time’,
which includes lag loss and stop loss.

Figure 1 The trajectory of a single-vehicle at an isolated

2.2 Vehicle delay models
signalised intersection
From Subsection 2.1, it is known that the overall delay
tc d includes deceleration delay, stopped delay and acceleration
Distance

l
H G delay. Webster (1958), HCM (Washington, 2000), and
Akçelik (1981) delay models have been widely used by the
c
V
V=

traffic engineers around the world for many years.

la F 2.2.1 The Webster delay model

B C D
V =0 E
ld Webster’s delay model is expressed as equation (1):
A
d = 0.5c(1 − λ) 2 (1 − λx) + 0.5 x 2 q(1 − x) ( )
(1)
− 0.65 ( c q 2 )
1/3
x (2 + 5 λ )
c
V

dd ds da
V=

where d is the average delay per vehicle at the intersection

in seconds per vehicle; c is the cycle length in seconds; q is
O
Time the average arrival flow rate in vehicles per second; λ is the
proportion of the effective green interval with respect to the
Figure 2 The vehicle flow at a signalised intersection during cycle length, given by λ = g / c (g is the effective green time
green interval (see online version for colours) in seconds); and x is the degree of saturation, a ratio of the
actual flow to the maximum flow and is given by x = q / λs,
(s is the saturation flow rate of vehicles per second).
Flow rate

Effective green interval

The first term in equation (1) estimates the average
approach delay assuming uniform arrivals and departures.
The second term considers the additional delays, which
accounts for the randomness of vehicle arrivals. And
Saturated
flow rate

Webster found the correction term, which is the third term,

Start loss
To account for the additional delays because of driver
reaction time and vehicle acceleration constraints, the signal
operation is usually defined in terms of effective intervals
instead of the actual intervals in the delay estimation models
shown in Figure 2. For example, when calculating the delay
time, we always divide the signal cycle into two effective
periods: stopped and moving. The difference between the
effective time interval and the actual time interval is related
to the assumptions regarding the driver’s reaction time at
the beginning of the green interval and the acceleration of
the vehicle within the limits.
From Figure 2, it can be seen that the traffic volume can
be represented by the area under the solid lines, which is
analytically equal to the area under the dash lines. The
is an empirical correction factor that reduces the estimated
delay by 5–15% of the overall delay, to be consistent with
Lag loss Stop loss simulation results.
One of the daunting issues in developing vehicle delay
Time models at isolated signalised intersections is the estimation
of overflow delay in a saturated or oversaturated condition.
As the degree of saturation of an intersection is high, the
value of average delay based on Webster’s delay model will
become extremely high. To deal with such a condition,
HCM 2000 and Akçelik’s delay models are proposed.
2.2.2 The HCM 2000 delay model
The expression in equation (2) is used in an updated form of
the HCM 2000 model:
d = d1 ⋅ PF + d 2 + d3 (2)
where d is the average control delay in seconds per vehicle;
d1 represents the uniform control delay assuming the
uniform arrivals in seconds per vehicle; PF is the uniform
delay progression adjustment factor, which displays the
 A novel analytical model for estimating vehicle delay at isolated signalised intersections
effects of signal progression; d2 means the incremental
delay in seconds per vehicle to account for the effect of
random arrivals and oversaturation queues, adjusted for the
duration of analysis period and the type of signal control;
and d3 is the initial queue delay, which accounts for the
delay to all vehicles in analysis period due to an initial
queue at the start of analysis period in seconds per vehicle.
The formula used to calculate the uniform control delay,
as expressed in equation (3), is constitutionally the same as
the first term of Webster’s delay expression in equation (1).
Note that the degree of saturation beyond 1.0 is not used to
obtain d1.
d1 = 0.50c(1 − g / c) 2 (1 − min(1, x) ⋅ g / c )
Non-uniform arrivals and oversaturated conditions cause an
incremental delay in traffic flow at an intersection. The
incremental delay and initial queue delay are obtained by
equations (4) and (5), respectively (Kim and Benekohal,
2005).
d 2 = 900T ( x − 1) + ( x − 1) 2 + 8kIx / (CT ) 
d3 = 3600 Qb C
where T is the duration of analysis period in hours; k is the
incremental delay factor depending on actuated signal
controller settings; I is the upstream filtering/metering
adjustment factor; C is the lane group capacity in vehicles
per hour; x represents the lane group v / c ratio, namely the
degree of saturation; Qb is the initial queue at the start of
period T.
2.2.3 The Akçelik delay model
Akçelik assumed that the total delay contained both the
delays accounting for deceleration and acceleration and
illustrated that the effect of the queue length must be
considered in delay. Thus, in Akçelik’s delay model, the
overall delay for an isolated fixed-time signalised
intersection was formulated as:
d = 0.5qc(1 − λ) 2 (1 − y ) + N 0 x
(
N 0 = 0.25QT ( x − 1) + ( x − 1) 2 + 12( x + x0 ) (QT )
where y is the flow ratio, given by y = q / s; N0 represents
the average over queue in vehicles; Q is the capacity in
vehicles per hour; and x0 is given by
x0 = 0.67 + sg / 600.
3 Operating characteristics based vehicle delay
model for a saturated or oversaturated
intersection
According to the analysis from Figure 2 in Subsection 2.1,
we know that as the signal turns to green, the queuing flow
starts, and the flow rate increases from zero to saturation
75
rate fast. The vehicles in the front of the queue move below
the saturation rate due to the reaction time and acceleration.
These vehicles make some undesired but inevitable loss
time. In a saturated or oversaturated condition, the queue
will not be cleared at the end of the green interval in a single
cycle, and thus it must be considered that some vehicles in
the queue will stop more than once. The deceleration delay
should be taken into consideration (Tan et al., 2013).
3.1 Theoretical analysis of vehicle delay based on
the operating characteristics of vehicles
3.1.1 Acceleration delay based on the operating
(3) characteristics of vehicles
In our model, it is assumed that as the signal turns green, the
first vehicle in the queue starts to move, which means
driver’s reaction time and operation time are necessary to be
considered. Thus, the start time can be expressed as
equation (8).
(4) t1start = t1reaction + t1operation (8)
(5) Assuming that there is no hindrance ahead, the first vehicle
can accelerate with desired acceleration freely subject to the
maximum fixed speed vmax. Without regard to the
overtaking, the following vehicles behind the first one will
move to conform to the car-following process.
The motion of the first vehicle is expressed as
equations (9) and (10).

v1 = a1 (t )dt (9)

x1 = v1 (t )dt =  a (t )dt
1 (10)
where v1 is the speed of the first vehicle in metres per
second, with the constraint v1 < vmax; a1(t) is the acceleration
of the first vehicle at time t in metres per second squared;
and x1 represents the displacement of the first vehicle in
metres.
The start process of the subsequent vehicles behind the
(6) first vehicle are all meeting with the car-following process,
hence the acceleration of the nth vehicle can be formulated
) (7)
in equation (11).
an (t + T ) = (1/ T ) ⋅ [ vn −1 (t ) − vn (t ) ] (11)
where an(t + T) is the acceleration of the nth vehicle at time
t + T in metres per second squared, and n = 2, 3, 4,…, T is
the driver’s reaction time in seconds; and vn–1(t) and vn(t)
represent the speed of the (n – 1)th vehicle and the following
vehicle n at time t in metres per second. Then the equations
of motion for the nth vehicle are expressed in equations (12)
and (13).

vn (t ) = an (t )dt (12)

xn = vn (t )dt =  a (t ) dt
n (13)
76 F. Qiao et al.
Assume that the first (n – 1) vehicles passing the stop line
do not achieve the desired travel speed until the nth vehicle
passes the stop line with approximately the optimal speed
vbest. With this speed, the headway reaches the minimum
value, and the vehicle flow passes the stop line as a
saturation flow. Thus, the acceleration delay can be
calculated as follows:
The delays of the first three vehicles can be expressed in
equations (14), (15), and (16).
d1 = t1start
d 2 = t2 actual − t1start − hsaturation
d3 = t3actual − t2 actual − hsaturation
where t1start is the start time, defined in equation (8); t2actual
and t3actual represent the actual time spent on the second
vehicle and the third vehicle passing the stop line in
seconds, respectively; and hsaturation means the saturated
headway in seconds.
The delay of the nth vehicle is given in equation (17).
d n = tnactual − t( n −1) actual − hsaturation
Since then the overall acceleration delay of the first n
vehicles can be obtained in equation (18).
Dacceleration = d1 + d 2 + d3 + " + d n
= t1start + ( t2 actual − t1start − hsaturation )
+ ( t3actual − t2 actual − hsaturation )
+ " + ( tnactual − t( n −1) actual − hsaturation )
Then
Dacceleration = tnactual − (n − 1)hsaturation
From equation (19), it can be clearly seen that the
acceleration delay is equal to the difference between the
actual time spent on the nth vehicle passing the stop line and
(n – 1) times the saturation headway. However, through the
analysis above, one can know that the acceleration delay
gained by such a method that takes the time loss of the first
several vehicles into consideration, which moves with less
than saturation flow rate and takes no account of the effect
of acceleration delay on the delay time of the subsequent
vehicles, which move with saturation flow rate.
3.1.2 Deceleration delay based on the operating
characteristics of vehicles
In the ideal condition, the vehicle flow passes the stop line
with saturation flow rate throughout the green interval, and
as the light turns red, all the vehicles stop immediately.
However, due to the individual differences in driving
behaviour, some vehicles will move on, whereas some will
stop and queue, which will cause the delay called
deceleration delay. Assuming that the (m – 1)th vehicle is the
last one that chooses to move on and passing the stop line as
the light turns to amber or flashes in green, thus, the mth
vehicle (the following one) will decelerate and stop at the
stop line, and the subsequent vehicles stop and queue
successively. The equations of motion for the mth vehicle
are expressed as equations (20) and (21).

vm = vm 0 + am (t )dt (20)

xm = vm 0 t + vm (t )dt = vm 0 t +  a
m (t ) dt (21)
where vm0 is the initial speed of the mth vehicle in metres per
(14) second, with the constraint vm0 < vmax; vm is the speed of the
mth vehicle in metres per second; am represents the
(15) deceleration of the mth vehicle at time t in metres per second
squared; and xm is the displacement of the mth vehicle in
(16) metres.
The initial speed of each vehicle in the flow is the same
due to the flow is moving with saturation headway, i.e.,
vm 0 = v( m +1)0 = " = v( m + k )0 .
And hypothesising the characteristics of the vehicles and
drivers are all the same, which means the deceleration of all
vehicles will be equal, that is,
(17)
am = am +1 = " = am + k .
And the space headway of the adjacent two vehicles is
obtained by hs = hsaturation ⋅ vm 0 , then, xm+k can be expressed
as equation (22).
(18) xm + k = xm + k ⋅ ( hs − L ) k = 1, 2,3,… (22)
where L is the safe stopping distance in metres.
In most of the previous research work, it is considered
that the deceleration delay is just the time loss of several
vehicles in the last of the queue, while the deceleration
(19) delay will make some more fearful influences on the
subsequent vehicles or cycles (Auberlen, 1965; Chang et al.,
2016; Gong and Wang, 2014; Chen and Zheng, 2013).
3.2 Theoretical analysis of the acceleration and
deceleration delays based on the operating and
queuing characteristics of vehicles
Based on the analysis in Subsection 3.1, an improved
method is proposed to address this problem. It is supposed
the acceleration delay happens, the condition of traffic flow
can be free, stable, or saturated. Thus, the study of the
acceleration delay will be divided into two categories in two
traffic conditions: undersaturated and saturated, respectively
(Tseng et al., 2014; Ma et al., 2009; Xue et al., 2010; Yang,
and Chung, 2012).
3.2.1 Acceleration delay in undersaturated condition
In this case, the queue can be cleared during a single green
interval, i.e. each vehicle in the queue just stops no more
than one time. The relationship between the queue and the
delay is shown in Figure 3.
 A novel analytical model for estimating vehicle delay at isolated signalised intersections 77

Figure 3 The queue-delay relationship in an undersaturated D1 = 0.5 FJ ⋅ ( r + AF ) − 0.5r ⋅ LE

condition (see online version for colours)
− 0.5 ( CD + FJ ) ⋅ CF − 0.5BC ⋅ CD
Q
 FJ ⋅ r + FJ ⋅ AF − r ⋅ LE − CD ⋅ CF 
= 0.5  
I  − FJ ⋅ CF − BC ⋅ CD 
J  
 FJ ⋅ r + FJ ⋅ AC − r ⋅ LE 
K = 0.5  
L  −CD ⋅ CF − BC ⋅ CD 
 
( AF − AB )( r + AB ) 
 
S = 0.5  − ( AC − AB ) ( S − S ′ ) ( r − AF + AC ) 
 2

 −qr S ( S − q ) 
q
S where AF is the total time spent on all the vehicles in
queue passing the intersection in seconds; AB is the time
D G
spent on the first vehicle passing the stop line in seconds; r
O A S acc means OA, the red interval in seconds; AC represents the
B C E F H t time spent by the first several vehicles passing the stop line
which move with an undersaturation flow rate in seconds; S
g r g r
and S′ are given by S = JG / DG = LE / AE and
In order to ease the calculation process, dashed lines are S ′ = DC / BC in vehicles per second, respectively; and q is
employed as auxiliary lines. From Figure 3, it is apparent
that the acceleration delay increases the delay of every vehicle arrival rate, calculated by q = LE / (r + AE ) in
vehicle in the queue, instead of the delay of the first several vehicles per second.
vehicles. The additional delay D1 is equal to the area of
polygon ABDJL, and thus the additional delay can be 3.2.2 Acceleration delay in saturated condition
expressed as equation (23).
In this case, the queue cannot be empty during a single
( AF − AB )( r + AB )  green interval, i.e. each vehicle still in queue will stop more
  than one time. The queue-delay relationship is shown in
D1 = 0.5  − ( AC − AB ) ( S − S ′ ) ( r − AF + AC )  (23) Figure 4.
 2

 −qr S ( S − q) 
Figure 4 The queue-delay relationship in a saturated condition
Proof: considering the start loss only (see online version
for colours)
As
Q
D1 = SΔJOF − SΔLOA − S JDCF − SΔBCD
1 1 G
SΔJOF = FO ⋅ FJ = FJ ⋅ ( r + AF )
2 2
1 1 F
SΔLOA = AO ⋅ LE = r ⋅ LE
2 2
1(
S JDCF = CD + FJ ) ⋅ CF E
2
1
SΔBCD = BC ⋅ CD q
2
Then, S
S

D
O A S acc H
B C t

g r g r
78 F. Qiao et al.

Referring to the calculation method of the vehicle delay Figure 5 The queue-delay relationship in a saturated condition
time in undersaturated condition, we know that the considering the stop loss only (see online version
for colours)
acceleration delay makes all the vehicles in queue produce
additional delay, which is equal to the area of polygon
Q
ABDEF, noted as D2, obtained by equation (24).
G
( 2 g − AC ) ( ( S − S ′ ) ⋅ AC + S ′ ⋅ AB ) 
D2 = 0.5   (24)
 + S ′ ( AC − AB ) ⋅ AB  F
E
Proof:
I D
As
D2 = SΔFAH − SCHED − SΔBCD q S dec
SΔFAH = 0.5 AH ⋅ HF
S
SCHED = 0.5 ( CD + HE ) ⋅ CH
SΔBCD = 0.5 BC ⋅ CD

Then, O A H
D2 = SΔFAH − SCHED − SΔBCD t
= 0.5 AH ⋅ HF − 0.5 ( CD + HE ) ⋅ CH r g y r
− 0.5 BC ⋅ CD From Figure 5, it is apparently known that the additional
vehicle delay can be expressed as equation (25).
= 0.5 ( AH ⋅ HF − HE ⋅ CH − CD ⋅ BH )
 g 2 S − ( CD + CH ⋅ S ) ⋅ CH  D3 = S ΔIEF = 0.5 ⋅ EF ⋅ ID (25)
= 0.5  
 − S ′ ⋅ BC ⋅ ( g − AB ) 
3.3 Theoretical analysis of vehicle delay considering
 2 gS ⋅ AC − S ⋅ AC 2 − 2 gS ′ ⋅ BC  both acceleration and deceleration delays based
= 0.5   on the operating and queuing characteristics of
 + S ′ ⋅ AC ⋅ BC + S ′ ⋅ AB ⋅ BC 
  vehicles
( 2 g − AC ) ( ( S − S ′ ) ⋅ AC + S ′ ⋅ AB ) 
= 0.5   Based on the discussion above, the queue and delay
 + S ′ ( AC − AB ) ⋅ AB  relationship considering both acceleration delay and
deceleration delay is shown in Figure 6.
where g is the green time in seconds; S and S′ are given by
S = HF / AH and S ′ = DC / BC in vehicles per second, Figure 6 The queue-delay considering both the start loss and
deceleration loss (see online version for colours)
respectively.
Q

3.2.3 Deceleration delay in saturated or

oversaturated condition
In saturated or oversaturated condition, as the traffic signal
turns to amber or the green light is flashing, some of the
vehicles will decelerate and queue, while some of the
vehicles will move on without deceleration. Thus, during
this period, the movement of the flow does not reach the
saturation flow rate, producing a delay, called deceleration
delay. S

In Figure 5, r, g and y represent the time interval of red,

U

green and yellow (or amber) light, respectively; OG is the

R
line of accumulative vehicle arrival; AF is the line of J
I L
P

accumulative vehicle departure (applied in previous H N

researches), which slope is S, called saturation flow rate; the E
G
F K M

polygonal line AIE is the line of accumulative vehicle

departure taking account of deceleration delay. O
D

A B C
t
y r g y r g y r g y r g y
 A novel analytical model for estimating vehicle delay at isolated signalised intersections 79

From Figure 6, it is apparent that as taking account of both 4 Simulation experiments

the acceleration and deceleration delays, the additional
The following scenario is considered for numerical
vehicle delay is equal to the area of polygon IABDEG in the
simulation. The saturation flow rate of each approach at the
first cycle, while in the second cycle, the additional delay
signalised intersection is set to 3,000 vphg, the arrival rate is
becomes to the area of polygon IGKMNPRSL, which is
in the range of 300–6,000 vphg, i.e. the degree of saturation
greater than that in the first cycle. With the passage of time,
in the range of 0.1–2, the cycle length is in the range of
the delay becomes larger and larger.
70–110s, the amber interval is 3s, and the green split is in
Assuming that a whole cycle C can be calculated by
the range of 0.4–0.5. In this research, a group of five
C = r + g + y, and thus, in the first cycle, the total delay in
successive cycles is considered, and the initial delay and
the ith cycle can be expressed by equation (26).
queue length both are equal to zero in the first cycle.
Di =  ni −1C + 0.5 ( qC 2 − S ( g + y ) 2 ) 
Cycle 1
+
( )
 mg − 0.5 ( m 2 − y 2 ) ( S − S ′ ) 
 (26) In the first cycle, the ranges of the variables at the
 + S ′t ⋅ ( g − 0.5t ) 
intersection are listed in Table 1. The average vehicle delay
+ (i − 1) ⋅ C ⋅ ( ( Sm − n) + y ⋅ ( S − S ′) ) is calculated with the models of Webster’s delay, the HCM
2000 delay, Akçelik’s delay, and the delay using the
Proof: proposed model, respectively, as well as the average vehicle
According to (24), the additional delay D4 is expressed by: delay obtained from the simulation with VISSIM
(Schroeder et al., 2014; Laufer et al., 2007; Yannes and
D4 = S ABDEHI + SΔEHG Lownes, 2010). The comparison results in the first cycle are
( 2 g − AC )( ( S − S ′) ⋅ AC + S ′ ⋅ AB )  shown in Figures 7 to 9.
= 0.5  
 + S ′ ( AC − AB ) ⋅ AB  Table 1 The ranges of variables in cycle 1

+ 0.5 ⋅ HG ⋅ EF Degree of
Cycle length (C) Green split (λ)
saturation (x)
In the second cycle, additional delay D5 is expressed by:
0.1–2 (by 0.1 70–110s (by 20s 0.4–0.5 (by 0.1
D5 = D4 + S ILKG + S SUKL increments) increments) increments)
= D4 + r ⋅ IG + ( g + y ) ⋅ IG
Figure 7 The prediction of average vehicle delay by some
= D4 + C ⋅ IG commonly used models as the cycle length is 70s,
(a) average delay with green split of 0.4 in different
Thus, the total delay in the ith cycle: degree of saturation conditions (b) average delay with
Di = Dabnormal + Dadditional green split of 0.5 in different degree of saturation
conditions (see online version for colours)
= ni −1C + 0.5 ( qC 2 − S ( g + y ) 2 ) Delay function of the degree of saturation
200
+ D 4 + (i − 1) ⋅ C ⋅ ( ( Sm − n) + y ⋅ ( S − S ′ ) )
180

=  ni −1C + 0.5 ( qC 2 − S ( g + y ) 2 ) 
Webster model Cycle length = 70s
160 Akcelik model Green split = 0.4
HCM model

( )
 mg − 0.5 ( m 2 − y 2 ) ( S − S ′ )  140 Proposed model
Average vehicle delay

+  120
Vissim model

 + S ′t ⋅ ( g − 0.5t ) 
100
+ (i − 1) ⋅ C ⋅ ( ( Sm − n) + y ⋅ ( S − S ′ ) ) 80

ni = ni −1 + qC − Sg 60

40
where m is the time spent on n vehicles moving with
20
undersaturation rate in seconds; t is the driver reaction time
in seconds. 0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2
And in (26), it is noted that in order to simplify the Degree of saturation

analysis, it is assumed that the flow rate during the period of (a)
the acceleration delay Sacc is approximate to the flow rate of
the deceleration delay Sdec(Sacc ≈ Sdec = S′) and that the
deceleration delay occurs at the beginning of the yellow (or
amber) interval.
80 F. Qiao et al.

Figure 7 The prediction of average vehicle delay by some
commonly used models as the cycle length is 70s,
(a) average delay with green split of 0.4 in different
degree of saturation conditions (b) average delay with
green split of 0.5 in different degree of saturation
conditions (continued) (see online version for colours)
Delay function of the degree of saturation
200
Figure 9 The prediction of average vehicle delay by some
commonly used models with the cycle length of 110s,
(a) average delay with green split of 0.4 in different
degree of saturation conditions (b) average delay with
green split of 0.5 in different degree of saturation
conditions (see online version for colours)
Delay function of the degree of saturation
150

180
Webster model Cycle length = 70s
Webster model Cycle length = 110s
160 Akcelik model Green split =0.5
Akcelik model Green split = 0.4
HCM model
HCM model
140 Proposed model
Proposed model
Average vehicle delay

100

Average vehicle delay

Vissim model
Vissim model
120

100

80

60 50

40

20

0 0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2
Degree of saturation Degree of saturation

(b) (a)
Delay function of the degree of saturation
Figure 8 The prediction of average vehicle delay by some 200

commonly used models as the cycle length is 90s, 180

(a) average delay with green split of 0.4 in different Webster model Cycle length = 110s
160 Akcelik model Green split = 0.5
degree of saturation conditions (b) average delay with HCM model
green split of 0.5 in different degree of saturation 140 Proposed model
Average vehicle delay

conditions (see online version for colours) 120

Vissim model

Delay function of the degree of saturation

100 100

90 80
Webster model Cycle length = 90s
80 Akcelik model Green split = 0.4 60
HCM model
70 Proposed model 40
Average vehicle delay

Vissim model
60
20
50
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2
40
Degree of saturation
30
(b)
20

10 From Figures 7 to 9, it is noted that in undersaturated

0 condition, the delay obtained with the proposed model is a
-10
negative value (revised as zero here), due to its
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2
Degree of saturation
1.4 1.6 1.8 2
preconditions. Both the Webster delay model and the
Akçelik delay model have discontinuity point (x = 1). It is
(a) because the average vehicle delay with the degree of
Delay function of the degree of saturation
150 saturation x = 1 is infinite in these two models. The Webster
delay model failed to obtain the average vehicle delay in the
Webster model Cycle length = 90s
Green split = 0.5
oversaturated condition, while the Akçelik model is still
Akcelik model
HCM model available to calculate the delay, because it takes both
100
Proposed model undersaturated and oversaturated conditions into
Average vehicle delay

Vissim model
consideration. It is clearly realised the improved model
proposed in this paper has a great performance fitting to the
actual delay (the VISSIM results), as well as HCM 2000
50 delay model in saturation or oversaturation condition (the
degree of saturation > 0.6).
In the next several cycles, the performances of HCM
2000 delay model and the proposed model are
0
comparatively investigated.
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2
Degree of saturation

(b)
 A novel analytical model for estimating vehicle delay at isolated signalised intersections 81

Table 2 The ranges of variables in cycles 2–5

Degree of saturation (x) Cycle length (C) Green split (λ)

0.7–2 70–110s (by 20s increments) 0.4–0.5 (by 0.1 increments)

Table 3 The comparison table of the lines and the corresponding degree of saturation

Proposed1 Proposed2 Proposed3 Proposed4 Proposed5 Proposed6

The name of lines Vissim1 Vissim2 Vissim3 Vissim4 Vissim5 Vissim6
HCM1 HCM2 HCM3 HCM4 HCM5 HCM6
The corresponding 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 1.5 2
degree of saturation

Figure 10 The average vehicle delay with the cycle length of 70s, (a) cycle length = 70s, green split = 0.4 (b) cycle length = 70s, green
split = 0.5 (see online version for colours)
Vehicle delay in cycle 2 - cycle 5 Vehicle delay in cycle2 - cycle 5 (2)
100 400
Proposed1
90 Proposed4
Vissim1
350 Vissim4
HCM1
80 Proposed2 HCM4
Vissim2 300 Proposed5
70 Vissim5
Average vehicle delay

HCM2
Average vehicle delay
250 HCM5
Proposed3
60 Vissim3 Proposed6
HCM3 Vissim6
200
50 HCM6

150
40

100
30

20 50

10 0
2 3 4 5 2 3 4 5
The number of cycle The number of cycle

(a)
Vehicle delay in cycle2 - cycle 5 (3) Vehicle delay in cycle 2 - cycle 5 (4)
60 350

Proposed1 Proposed4
55 Vissim4
Vissim1 300
HCM4
HCM1
50 Proposed5
Proposed2
250 Vissim5
45 Vissim2
HCM5
Average vehicle delay
Average vehicle delay

HCM2
Proposed6
40 Proposed3 200 Vissim6
Vissim3
35 HCM6
HCM3
150
30

25 100

20
50
15

10 0
2 3 4 5 2 3 4 5
The number of cycle The number of cycle

(b)
82 F. Qiao et al.

Figure 11 The average vehicle delay with the cycle length of 90s, (a) cycle length = 90s, green split = 0.4 (b) cycle length = 90s, green
split = 0.5 (see online version for colours)
Vehicle delay in cycle 2 - cycle 5 (5) Vehicle delay in cycle 2 - cycle 5 (6)
120 450
Proposed4
Proposed1
110 400 Vissim4
Vissim1
HCM4
HCM1
100 350 Proposed5
Proposed2
Vissim5
90 Vissim2
300 HCM5

Average vehicle delay

Average vehicle delay

HCM2
Proposed6
80 Proposed3
250 Vissim6
Vissim3
HCM6
70 HCM3
200
60
150
50

100
40

30 50

20 0
2 3 4 5 2 3 4 5
The number of cycle The number of cycle

(a)
Vehicle delay in cycle 2 - cycle 5 (7) Vehicle delay in cycle 2 - cycle 5 (8)
70 450

Proposed4
65 Proposed1 400 Vissim4
Vissim1
HCM4
60 HCM1
350 Proposed5
Proposed2
55 Vissim5
Vissim2
300 HCM5
HCM2
Average vehicle delay
Average vehicle delay

50 Proposed6
Proposed3
Vissim6
Vissim3 250
45 HCM6
HCM3
40 200

35
150
30
100
25
50
20

15 0
2 3 4 5 2 3 4 5
The number of cycle The number of cycle

(b)

Figure 12 The average vehicle delay with the cycle length of 110s, (a) cycle length = 110s, green split = 0.4 (b) cycle length = 110s,
green split = 0.5 (see online version for colours)
Vehicle delay in cycle 2 - cycle 5 (9) Vehicle delay in cycle 2 - cycle 5 (10)
200 500

Proposed4
Proposed1 450
180 Vissim4
Vissim1
HCM4
HCM1
160 400 Proposed5
Proposed2
Vissim5
Vissim2
350 HCM5
Average vehicle delay

HCM2
Average vehicle delay

140
Proposed6
Proposed3
300 Vissim6
Vissim3
120 HCM6
HCM3
250
100

200
80

150
60
100
40
50
2 3 4 5 2 3 4 5
The number of cycle The number of cycle

(a)
 A novel analytical model for estimating vehicle delay at isolated signalised intersections 83

Figure 12 The average vehicle delay with the cycle length of 110s, (a) cycle length = 110s, green split = 0.4 (b) cycle length = 110s,
green split = 0.5 (continued) (see online version for colours)
Vehicle delay in cycle 2 - cycle 5 (11) Vehicle delay in cycle 2 - cycle 5 (12)
70 500
Proposed1 Proposed4
65 Vissim1 450 Vissim4
HCM1 HCM4
60 Proposed2 400 Proposed5
Vissim2 Vissim5
55 350 HCM5
HCM2
Average vehicle delay

Average vehicle delay

Proposed3 Proposed6
50 300 Vissim6
Vissim3
HCM3 HCM6
45 250

40 200

35 150

30 100

25 50

20 0
2 3 4 5 2 3 4 5
The number of cycle The number of cycle

(b)

Cycle 2–5 4 As the cycle length is fixed, augmenting the green split
will reduce the average vehicle delay effectively in the
From the second cycle to the fifth cycle, the ranges of
saturated condition, while it is not helpful to increase
variables are listed in Table 2.
the green split to shorten the average vehicle delay in
The average vehicle delay in each cycle is obtained with
the oversaturated condition.
HCM 2000 delay model, the proposed delay model and
VISSIM simulation, respectively, in different conditions, 5 The results show that the proposed model is much more
like different cycle lengths, different degrees of saturation reasonable and preferable than the HCM, especially in
(greater than 0.7), and different green split within the oversaturated condition.
duration of 2–5 cycles. The comparison results are shown in
Figures 10 to 12. The legends in Figures 10 to 12 are given
in Table 3. 5 The error rates and correlation coefficients of
The following results can be obtained from the delay estimations
discussion through comparison of Figures 10 to 12:
The error rates of the proposed model, HCM2000 model,
1 The average vehicle delay gained by HCM2000 and simulation via VISSIM are used to evaluate the
increases slightly with the growing number of cycles in performance of these models. The mean absolute error
the saturated condition (0.7 < x < 1), whereas under the (MAE), mean squared error (MSE) and average relative
oversaturated condition (x > 1), the average vehicle error (ARE) are applied to calculate for both saturated and
delay produced by HCM2000 increases rapidly, which oversaturated conditions and are shown in Tables 4 and 5.
deviates from the actual delay.
Table 4 The error rates
2 The general trends of the proposed model are
approximately parallel to the actual delay for both Models Error rates 0.7 < x < 1 x>1
saturation and oversaturation condition, where the HCM2000 MAE 8.72 53.53
HCM model displays great deviation.
MSE 137.67 5,868.36
3 As the green split is fixed, with the increase of the cycle ARE 0.27 0.53
length, the cycle-by-cycle average vehicle delay Proposed model MAE 3.59 9.22
obtained by the proposed model and VISSIM both MSE 20.72 131.41
become greater and greater, especially for the last ARE 0.12 0.11
several cycles. Due to the accumulative effect of
vehicle delay at an intersection under the saturated
Table 5 The correlation coefficients
condition, while in the oversaturated condition, the
cycle-by-cycle average vehicle delay is relatively stable Correlation coefficients
in the last several cycles. Models
0.7 < x < 1 x>1 Overall
HCM2000 0.81 0.72 0.83
Proposed model 0.96 0.96 0.97
84 F. Qiao et al.
It can be seen from Tables 4 and 5 that, compared with the
HCM2000 model, the estimation errors obtained from the
proposed model are smaller in both conditions and produces
better results. In saturated condition, both HCM2000 and
the proposed model are effective. However, in the
oversaturated condition, the HCM2000 generates relatively
worse results.
Analysing the correlation coefficients of these two
models, it is clearly recognised that the correlation
coefficient of the proposed model is the best one, no matter
in a saturated condition, oversaturated condition, or overall
(0.7 < x).
6 Conclusions
A novel model was proposed in this research to estimate the
vehicle delay at an isolated signalised intersection in the
saturated or oversaturated condition during a number of
successive cycles. In this paper, the average vehicle delay of
the proposed model is compared with the Webster model,
the HCM2000 model, the Akçelik model, as well as the
simulation results from VISSIM. It was shown that the
HCM and the proposed model could perform well in
saturated and oversaturated conditions, while the Webster
model was just available and helpful for undersaturated
conditions. The Akçelik model gave some relatively bigger
errors in saturated and oversaturated conditions even if the
Akçelik model could be used in these conditions.
Furthermore, in saturated or oversaturated traffic conditions,
the Webster model was not valid anymore and the Akçelik
model was not preferred or recommended. In addition,
numerical simulation studies were conducted with the HCM
model and the proposed model within a duration of 4
continuous cycles (2–5 cycles) at an isolated saturated or
oversaturated signalised intersection. The results showed
that the proposed method performed better than the HCM
method, especially for high traffic demands and
oversaturated traffic conditions. Therefore the new
improved model could offer some greater convenient and
stronger support to the transportation engineers and
managers to evaluate the performance of the saturated or
oversaturated signalised intersections effectively and
accurately, and may have important implications to
practitioners for the planning, design and analysis of
signalised intersections.
References
Abu-Lebdeh, G. and Benekohal, R.F. (2003) ‘Design and
evaluation of dynamic traffic management strategies for
congested conditions’, Transportation Research Part A,
Vol. 37, No. 2, pp.109–127.
Akçelik, R. (1981) Traffic Signals: Capacity and Timing Analysis,
Research Report ARR No. 123, Australian Road Research
Board, Vermont South, Australia, (7th reprint: 1998).
Akçelik, R. and Rouphail, N.M. (1993) ‘Estimation of delays at
traffic signals for variable demand conditions’,
Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Vol. 27,
No. 2, pp.109–131.
Auberlen, R. (1965) ‘The operating characteristics of motor
vehicles as a factor in road alignments – evaluation by means
of electronic computers’, Journal of Herpetology, Vol. 15,
No. 2, pp.151–154.
Benekohal, R.F. and Kim, S.O. (2005) ‘Arrival-based uniform
delay model for oversaturated signalized intersections with
poor progression’, Transportation Research Record Journal
of the Transportation Research Board, Vol. 1920, No. 1,
pp.86–94.
Capelle, D.G. and Pinnell, C. (1961) ‘Capacity study of signalized
diamond interchanges’, Highway Research Board Bulletin,
Vol. 291, pp.1–25
Chang, X., Rong, J., Zhou, C. and Li, H. (2016) ‘Relationship
between driver’s feeling and vehicle operating characteristics
on urban road’, 12th World Congress on Intelligent Control
and Automation (WCICA), pp.3033–3037.
Chen, S., Hao, X.U. and Liu, H. (2013) ‘Timing oversaturated
signals: what can we learn from classic and state-of-the-art
signal control models’, Journal of Transportation Systems
Engineering & Information Technology, Vol. 13, No. 1,
pp.97–110.
Chen, S., Mulgrew, B. and Grant, P.M. (1993) ‘A clustering
technique for digital communications channel equalization
using radial basis function networks’, IEEE Transactions on
Neural Networks, Vol. 4, No. 4, pp.570–590.
Chen, Y. and Luca, G.D. (2018) ‘Technologies for developing a
smart city in computational thinking’, International Journal
of Simulation and Process Modelling, Vol. 13, No. 2,
pp.91–101.
Chen, Y. and Zheng, S. (2013) ‘Mechanism analysis of vehicles
operating characteristic affected by visual environment of
underground road’, Journal of Tongji University, Vol. 41,
No. 7, pp.1031–1039.
Chen, Y., Qiao, F., Guo, L. and Liu, T. (2021) ‘GAPSO-based
traffic signal control in isolated intersection with multiple
objectives’, in Li, Y., Zhu, Q., Qiao, F., Fan, Z. and Chen, Y.
(Eds.): Advances in Simulation and Process Modelling,
ISSPM 2020, Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing,
Vol. 1305, Springer, Singapore, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-
981-33-4575-1_26.
Dion, F., Rakha, H. and Kang, Y.S. (2004) ‘Comparison of delay
estimates at under-saturated and over-saturated pre-timed
signalized intersections’, Transportation Research Part B
Methodological, Vol. 38, No. 2, pp.99–122.
Gong, J.Q. and Wang, Y.Y. (2014) ‘Emergency operation
characteristics of vehicle driver based on mathematics
model’, The Fifth International Conference on Intelligent
Systems Design and Engineering Applications, IEEE
Computer Society, pp.447–450.
Greenshields, B.D., Schapiro, D. and Ericksen, E.L. (1947)
‘Traffic performance at urban street intersections’, Traffic
Quarterly, Vol. 1, pp.254–267.
Kim, S.O. and Benekohal, R.F. (2005) ‘Comparison of control
delays from CORSIM and the highway capacity manual for
oversaturated signalized intersections’, Journal of
Transportation Engineering, Vol. 131, No. 12, pp.917–923.
 A novel analytical model for estimating vehicle delay at isolated signalised intersections
Laufer, J., Australia, M. and Australia, N. (2007) ‘Freeway
capacity, saturation flow and the car following behavioural
algorithm of the VISSIM microsimulation software’, Colloids
& Surfaces: A Physicochemical & Engineering Aspects,
Vol. 157, Nos. 1–3, pp.295–305.
Luo, L., Zeng, X., Chen, Y. and Sun, D.J. (2019) ‘Determining
acceleration lane length on expressway weaving area using
microscopic traffic simulation’, International Symposium for
Intelligent Transportation and Smart City, pp.13–27.
Ma, Y., Li, W. Fan, P., Letaief, K.B. and Liu, X. (2009) ‘On the
characteristics of queueing and scheduling at encoding nodes
for network coding’, International Journal of Communication
Systems, Vol. 22, No. 6, pp.755–772.
Qiao, F., Sun, H., Wang, Z. and Tobi, F.A. (2018) ‘NSQGA based
optimization of traffic signal in isolated intersection with
multiple objectives, innovative techniques and applications of
modelling, identification and control’, in Zhu, Q., Na, J. and
Wu, X. (Eds.): Lecture Notes in Electrical Engineering,
Springer, 21 April, pp.291–305.
Schroeder, B.J., Salamati, K. and Hummer, J. (2014) ‘Calibration
and field validation of four double-crossover diamond
interchanges in VISSIM microsimulation’, Transportation
Research Record Journal of the Transportation Research
Board, Vol. 2404, No. -1, pp.49–58.
Sun, H., Qiao, F., Wang, Z. and Guo, L. (2019) ‘A two-level
identification model for selecting the coordination strategy for
the urban arterial road based on fuzzy logic’, International
Journal of Simulation and Process Modelling, Vol. 14, No. 6,
pp.478–487.
85
Tan, J., Li, L., Li, Z. and Zhang, Y. (2013) ‘Distribution models
for start-up lost time and effective departure flow rate’,
Transportation Research Part A, Vol. 51, No. 5, pp.1–11.
Tseng, P.Y., Chang, C.W. and Yang, H.Y. (2014) ‘Queue
discharge characteristics of straight-through lanes for taiwan
depressed urban streets’, Journal of the Eastern Asia Society
for Transportation Studies, Vol. 10, pp.2312–2324.
Washington, D. (2000) ‘Highway capacity manual’, Special
Report, Vol. 1, Nos. 1–2, pp.5–7.
Webster, F.V. (1958) ‘Traffic signal settings’, Road Research
Technical Paper, p.39, Road Research Laboratory, London.
Xue, L., Wu, M. and Yan, H. (2010) ‘A study of vehicle
characteristics of signalized intersection based on queuing
theory’, Wseas Transactions on Mathematics, Vol. 9, No. 11,
pp.851–860.
Yang, S. and Chung, E. (2012) ‘Driver response time of queuing
vehicles at urban signalized intersections’, Procedia - Social
and Behavioral Sciences, Vol. 43, No. 43, pp.169–177.
Yannes, C.D. and Lownes, N.E. (2010) ‘Driver behaviour
considerations in calibrating microsimulation models for
capacity’, International Journal of Society Systems Science,
Vol. 2, No. 1, pp.84–99(16).