Re: [sumo-user] Problem about the DUE in simulation

2020-06-30 Thread yun-pang.floetteroed
Hi Jane, Your approach sounds quite complicated and I am not sure if I get you points correctly. It is also not clear how steps 1 and 2 exactly interact with each other…. You could set all the vehicles keeping the original assigned routes within the first 3600 s in the duaIterate.py so that

Re: [sumo-user] Gap acceptance in lane changing

2020-06-30 Thread Solmaz Razmi Rad - CITG
Yes, I used the actual gap values (leaderGap, followerGap). Just made a mistake to mention secureGap earlier. But still, I don’t see any differences in the actual gap values (leaderGap, followerGap) with changing lcAssertive. From: sumo-user-boun...@eclipse.org On Behalf Of Jakob Erdmann

Re: [sumo-user] Gap acceptance in lane changing

2020-06-30 Thread Jakob Erdmann
The secureGaps are not only influenced by tau but also by vehicle speed. Changing tau can have a major influence on scenario dynamics including average speeds so a naive interpretation of the distribution is misleading. the *secureGap values in the lanechange-output are always those for

Re: [sumo-user] Gap acceptance in lane changing

2020-06-30 Thread Solmaz Razmi Rad - CITG
Hi Jakob, Following our discussion below, I tried to run the simulation with different lcAssertive and tau values to see how they affect the value of requiredGap (in seconds) which is calculated as: “(secureBackGap + followerMinGap + subjectLength + subjectMinGap + secureFrontGap)/Speed” and

Re: [sumo-user] DFROUTER Detector type is discarded for most of detectors

2020-06-30 Thread Jakob Erdmann
One day is the default. For hourly aggregation you need to pass the option --interval 60 Am Di., 30. Juni 2020 um 10:34 Uhr schrieb anilbaral : > Thank You so much! The latest version of edgeDataFromFlow.py is working > when > I updated tools/sumolib; however, I see the segregation of data on

Re: [sumo-user] stop output and trip output do not match

2020-06-30 Thread Tripplanner Mumbai
Hello Jakob, My apologies for misinterpreting your statements, thanks for your clarification. Yes, the analysis is true there are multiple persons with single or double riding. Now, I am trying to extract the trip information using TraCI, but not successful right now. In Particular, I was trying

Re: [sumo-user] DFROUTER Detector type is discarded for most of detectors

2020-06-30 Thread Jakob Erdmann
In order to use the updated edgeDataFromFlow.py you need to update the rest of tools/sumolib as well. You can check the difference between input counts and routeSampler output counts directly by setting option --mismatch-output The resulting file can be loaded and visualized in sumo-gui. To check

Re: [sumo-user] DFROUTER Detector type is discarded for most of detectors

2020-06-30 Thread anilbaral
Hi Jakob, I have downloaded the latest version of edgeDataFromFlow.py and tried to generate the edge data. But the latest version is showing some error. The error message is as follows: C:\Users\Anil\Desktop\SUMO June 30>python sumo-git/tools/detector/edgeDataFromFlow.py -d parisdetectors.xml

Re: [sumo-user] stop output and trip output do not match

2020-06-30 Thread Jakob Erdmann
I never claimed that trip-output == stop-output - running, only that persons still running are responsible for trip-output != stop-output. This is because a person that is still in the simulation may have previously taken any number of rides and all of those are missing from the trip-output. As

Re: [sumo-user] stop output and trip output do not match

2020-06-30 Thread Tripplanner Mumbai
Hello, I ran it again using the TraCI program and the log says the following. Persons: [Inserted: 9000, Running: 28, Jammed: 167] Possibly, you are pointing out to Running: 28 which is the discrepancy. Furthermore, I share the following counts of rides got from the execution: