- changing minGap is fine - changing lcAssertive should not be necessary since the desired gaps can be tuned via attributes of the carFollowModel - lcAssertive is useful for lane changing with reduced safety (and possibly to compensate for overly conservative driving behavior at lane drops) - setting tau is probably useful since it is the main parameter that determines vehicle spacing at high speed
Am Do., 10. Feb. 2022 um 08:54 Uhr schrieb mehmet nedim yavuz < [email protected]>: > I would like to model human-driven vehicles and autonomous vehicles which > have different autonomy levels (i.e Level-2 and Level 4 for my case). I > decrease minGap value through Level 0 to Level-4 based on literature > studies. For the lane-changing behaviour, lcassertive value affects vehicle > distance gaps behind and in front of it. These gaps are already determined > by car following model parameters, so the gaps do not need further > influence from a lane changing parameter which would either encourage or > discourage AV lane changing. I am not sure that changing both of > them(minGap and lcAssertive value) or changing only car-following > parameter is true approach? Regards. > _______________________________________________ > sumo-user mailing list > [email protected] > To unsubscribe from this list, visit > https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/sumo-user >
_______________________________________________ sumo-user mailing list [email protected] To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/sumo-user
