Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

lane-changing often fails when using action-step-length #4457

Open
namdre opened this issue Aug 25, 2018 · 4 comments
Open

lane-changing often fails when using action-step-length #4457

namdre opened this issue Aug 25, 2018 · 4 comments

Comments

@namdre
Copy link
Contributor

namdre commented Aug 25, 2018

Currently, vehicles only enact their own speed-advice with the delay of 1 action step. This often fails to create the necessary gaps in a timely manner.

The problem is especially pronounced if action-steps of interacting vehicle do not happen in the same simulation step. Coordinated gap-creation works badly with out-of-sync speed adjustments because vehicles react to the state that is observed in their own action step and request cooperative speed adjustments accordingly. By the time the other vehicle can make use of the speed request, it's own state has changed and the advice is no longer ideal.
Non-synchronized action-steps easily appear due to sub-second depart delay or explicit sub-second departure times.

One possible solution would be to increase the frequency of patchSpeed and lane change attempts (e.g. to the step-length) once a maneuver failed. This would fit the assumption that drivers enact a planned speed-change and lane-change maneuver rather than react with delay to unforeseen developments.

@namdre
Copy link
Contributor Author

namdre commented Aug 25, 2018

@leoluecken request for comments.

@namdre
Copy link
Contributor Author

namdre commented Sep 11, 2018

maybe related to #4563

@namdre
Copy link
Contributor Author

namdre commented May 12, 2023

maybe related to #4563

in hindsight, probably not

@namdre
Copy link
Contributor Author

namdre commented May 12, 2023

the problem would be mitigated by #3665

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants