Highway traffic state prediction method based on spatial-temporal correlation and physical information constraints
W.
Feng, W. Wu, Y. Guo, Y. Gao, W. Shan
Pages: 3-26
Abstract:
Highway
traffic state prediction is needed for intelligent traffic control and
decision-making. However, current approaches face challenges in modeling
spatiotemporal features, addressing data sparsity, and maintaining adherence
to physical laws. This study introduces a novel traffic state prediction
model that combines physical information with a hybrid Convolutional Neural
Network (CNN) and Long Short-Term Memory (LSTM) network approach
(PI-CNN-LSTM) to achieve precise road traffic state forecasting. Initially, a
hybrid CNN-LSTM deep-learning architecture was developed to capture
spatial-temporal features. The CNN was used to extract the spatial topology
correlation features of the road network, and the LSTM was combined to model
the time series evolution law of traffic parameters, and the temporal and
spatial dependence of traffic states was captured synchronously.
Subsequently, to ensure the predictions align with traffic flow conservation
laws, a physical regularization loss function was formulated using the
Greenberg fundamental diagram and Lighthill Whitham Richards (LWR)
conservation equation. The fundamental diagram parameters, including
free-flow velocity and blockage density, were determined by the neural
network within the loss function. Finally, the model's generalization
capability under sparse data was enhanced by training on subsets of the
Canadian Whitemud Drive dataset at sampling rates of 10%, 20%, and 30%. The
experimental results showed that on working days, when the data sampling rate
was 10%, the Mean Square Error (MSE) of PI-CNN-LSTM was 13.24, the Mean
Absolute Error (MAE) was 7.21, and the Mean Absolute Percentage Error (MAPE)
was 6.98%. When the sampling rate was increased to 30%, the MSE was 12.05,
which decreased by only 1.19 compared to the sampling rate of 10%. This
indicates that the physical constraints significantly enhanced the model's
ability to adapt to the data sparsity. In the highly volatile traffic
scenario on non-working days, PI-CNN-LSTM maintained a stable performance.
The MSE was 10.75 at a 10% sampling rate and dropped to 9.01 at a 30%
sampling rate. Among all the evaluation indicators, compared with the
CNN-LSTM and PIDL models, the error was significantly reduced, which proves
the validity and superiority of the proposed model.
Keywords: traffic
state prediction; physics-informed deep-learning; intelligent transportation
systems; velocity prediction
2026 ISSUES
2025 ISSUES
2024 ISSUES
LXII - April 2024LXIII - July 2024LXIV - November 2024Special 2024 Vol1Special 2024 Vol2Special 2024 Vol3Special 2024 Vol4
2023 ISSUES
LIX - April 2023LX - July 2023LXI - November 2023Special Issue 2023 Vol1Special Issue 2023 Vol2Special Issue 2023 Vol3
2022 ISSUES
LVI - April 2022LVII - July 2022LVIII - November 2022Special Issue 2022 Vol1Special Issue 2022 Vol2Special Issue 2022 Vol3Special Issue 2022 Vol4
2021 ISSUES
LIII - April 2021LIV - July 2021LV - November 2021Special Issue 2021 Vol1Special Issue 2021 Vol2Special Issue 2021 Vol3
2020 ISSUES
2019 ISSUES
Special Issue 2019 Vol1Special Issue 2019 Vol2Special Issue 2019 Vol3XLIX - November 2019XLVII - April 2019XLVIII - July 2019
2018 ISSUES
Special Issue 2018 Vol1Special Issue 2018 Vol2Special Issue 2018 Vol3XLIV - April 2018XLV - July 2018XLVI - November 2018
2017 ISSUES
Special Issue 2017 Vol1Special Issue 2017 Vol2Special Issue 2017 Vol3XLI - April 2017XLII - July 2017XLIII - November 2017
2016 ISSUES
Special Issue 2016 Vol1Special Issue 2016 Vol2Special Issue 2016 Vol3XL - November 2016XXXIX - July 2016XXXVIII - April 2016
2015 ISSUES
Special Issue 2015 Vol1Special Issue 2015 Vol2XXXV - April 2015XXXVI - July 2015XXXVII - November 2015
2014 ISSUES
Special Issue 2014 Vol1Special Issue 2014 Vol2Special Issue 2014 Vol3XXXII - April 2014XXXIII - July 2014XXXIV - November 2014
2013 ISSUES
2012 ISSUES
2011 ISSUES
2010 ISSUES
2009 ISSUES
2008 ISSUES
2007 ISSUES
2006 ISSUES
2005 ISSUES
2004 ISSUES
2003 ISSUES
