Hello Jakob,

Thank you for the update. So if I understand correctly: to completely
disable strategic lane changing by SUMO, I have to
1. set the laneChangeMode bits 0 and 1 (for strategic lane changes) to 0
AND also
2. set lcStrategic to -1 in my routes files for the vType
Because only setting relevant laneChangeMode bits and then setting
lcStrategic=1 may still allow strategic lane changes at the end of the lane?

Is this also true for lcSpeedGain and lcCooperative? Since there are also
changes in behaviour when I isolate lcCooperative parameter (keeping
lcStrategic and lcSpeedGain fixed at 1), i.e.,
a. when I set laneChangeMode bits 2 and 3 to 0, and set lcCooperative to 1,
vs.
b. when I set laneChangeMode bits 2 and 3 to 0, and set lcCooperative to 0,

I would have expected a. and b. to give me the same behaviour/time to
complete the simulation, since I believe laneChangeMode completely disabled
certain types of lane changes - but it seems that the lcParams still have
some effect. Please advise.

Thank you.

Sincerely,
Hriday


On Thu, 12 May 2022 at 06:36, Jakob Erdmann <[email protected]> wrote:

> The key difference is that the laneChangeMode completely disables
> strategic lane changing whereas lcStrategic="0" only sets the strategic
> lookahead distance to the minimum possible value. Vehicles will still
> perform a strategic laneChange when reaching the very end of their lane.
> You can set lcStrategic to a negative value to disable strategic lane
> changing completely but this was (until now) undocumented.
>
> regards,
> Jakob
>
> Am Di., 10. Mai 2022 um 19:11 Uhr schrieb Hriday Sanghvi via sumo-user <
> [email protected]>:
>
>> Hello again,
>>
>> I use *lc_params* to refer to the 3 parameters lcStrategic,
>> lcCooperative, and lcSpeedGain in the previous email, and *lc_mode *to
>> refer to the lane changing mode. To clarify, here are some experimental
>> results for each case for 100 vehicles on a 1000 m road with 2 free lanes
>> (NO blockages):
>> +-----------------+---------+------+
>> | *lc_params*       | *lc_mode* | *Time* |
>> +-----------------+---------+------+
>> | Set to 1        | 512     | *241*  |
>> +-----------------+---------+------+
>> | Unset (default) | 512     | *241*  |
>> +-----------------+---------+------+
>> | Set to 0        | 512     | 172  |
>> +-----------------+---------+------+
>> | Set to 1        | 1621    | *204*  |
>> +-----------------+---------+------+
>> | Unset (default) | 1621    | *204*  |
>> +-----------------+---------+------+
>> | Set to 0        | 1621    | 218  |
>> +-----------------+---------+------+
>>
>> As seen from the table, Regardless of whether the lc_params are set to
>> their default value (1) explicitly, or if they are unset (default value is
>> used), the result (time in steps) of the simulation stays the same in both
>> cases of the lc_mode (512 and 1621). This is in line with my understanding.
>> However, when the lc_mode is set to 512, lc_params should in fact make no
>> difference since the behaviour controlled by these lc_params were already
>> deactivated - namely, do no strategic changes, do no cooperative changes
>> and do no speed gain changes.
>>
>> So what I gather is that there is some form of hierarchy - Which
>> parameter do I set to overwrite the other no matter what? Or why would
>> setting lc_params to 0 in the case of lc_mode = 512 make a difference?
>>
>> Thank you.
>>
>> Sincerely,
>> Hriday
>>
>> On Tue, 10 May 2022 at 14:01, Hriday Sanghvi <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> *My belief*: The lane change mode 512 is supposed to disable all
>>> autonomous lane-changing except for safety-gap enforcement and collision
>>> avoidance. So setting lcSpeedGain=0 or lcStrategic=0 should be pointless,
>>> since that is the same effect achieved by setting lane change mode to 512,
>>> since bits 0 through 6 are all set to 0 : do no strategic changes, do no
>>> cooperative changes, do no speed gain changes, do no right drive changes;
>>>
>>> *Discovery*: When I set *lcStrategic=0, lcCooperative=0, and
>>> lcSpeedGain=0*  on my vType anyway as such:
>>> <vType lcStrategic="0" lcCooperative="0" lcSpeedGain="0" carFollowModel=
>>> "Krauss" color="0,1,0" id="veh" latAlignment="center" lcKeepRight="0"
>>> lcLookaheadLeft="1" lcOvertakeRight="1" lcSpeedGainRight="1" length="5"
>>> sigma="0" speedDev="0" speedFactor="1.0" />
>>> The behaviour seems to have changed drastically.
>>>
>>> With an LC mode of 512,
>>> *1. Without setting the 3 lcParams*, it takes 100 vehicles *477s *to
>>> reach the end of a 1000m road with 2 lanes, with a small blockage from (500
>>> - 750m) on one of the lanes.
>>> *2.* *Setting the 3 lcParams, *it takes the same only *262s*
>>>
>>> *Doubt:* Am I misunderstanding what autonomous lane-changing means? Or
>>> are the two: lcParams and lane change mode not equivalent in the way I have
>>> mentioned?
>>>
>>> Please advise.
>>>
>>> Thank you.
>>>
>>> Sincerely,
>>> Hriday
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>
_______________________________________________
sumo-user mailing list
[email protected]
To unsubscribe from this list, visit 
https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/sumo-user

Reply via email to