Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 59 references

Quantum Annealing-Enhanced Virtual Traffic Lights and its Evaluation Using a Quantum-in-the-Loop Simulation Testbed

T0 review · 4 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read Quantum annealing lowers stopped delay and travel time at virtual traffic lights compared with classical optimizers and actuated signals.

desk verdict A real D-Wave/SUMO quantum-in-the-loop testbed for 8-phase virtual traffic lights, but the QA advantage claim needs an exact classical baseline before it means anything. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.18776 v2 pith:4PHF5SZG submitted 2024-12-22 cs.OH

Abyad Enan , M Sabbir Salek , Mashrur Chowdhury , Gurcan Comert , Sakib M. Khan , Reek Majumder This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.OH
keywords virtualtrafficlightsquantumannealingQUBOconnectedvehiclessignaloptimizationSUMOsimulationD-Wavestoppeddelay
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper tries to establish that a quantum annealer can make virtual traffic lights (VTL) control an intersection better than classical optimization and better than a conventional actuated signal. In VTL, connected vehicles receive right-of-way based on current traffic conditions; the authors formulate the choice of which of the eight standard NEMA phases gets right-of-way, and in what order, as a QUBO problem solved on a D-Wave quantum annealer. They connect that optimizer to the SUMO microscopic traffic simulator through a cloud link and compare stopped delays and travel times under three traffic volumes and three VTL zone lengths. The reported outcome is that quantum annealing produces lower delays and travel times than hill climbing, simulated annealing, and an actuated signal in nearly all tested cases, with statistically significant t-test results except at 35% capacity versus simulated annealing. If correct, the method points toward infrastructure-free intersection control where a cloud annealer generates signal phase and timing instructions directly from connected-vehicle data.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the QUBO formulation of an 8-city asymmetric open-loop TSP over NEMA phases. Each binary variable \$x_{i,k}\$ says whether phase \$i\$ occupies position \$k\$ in the right-of-way sequence; the cost \$d_{ij}\$ is the total stopped delay of vehicles in phase \$j\$ when phase \$i\$ immediately precedes it, computed from per-vehicle ETAs as \$d_{56} = \sum_i \max(0, t_5 - t_{6i} + Y + R)\$ for the example of phase 5 before phase 6. Equality constraints (every phase used once, every position filled once) become quadratic penalties with Lagrange multiplier \$\gamma = 100\$, and the annealer converts the QUBO to an Ising Hamiltonian whose ground state encodes the best sequence. The mechanism that carries the argument is the claim that quantum tunneling lets the annealer escape local minima that trap hill climbing and simulated annealing.

What would settle it

In the same SUMO scenario, replace the annealer's output with an exhaustive search over all feasible NEMA phase orders that uses the simulator's actual measured stopped delay for each order rather than the pairwise \$d_{ij}\$ proxy; if a phase order regularly beats the annealer's choice, the QUBO objective is not minimizing the real quantity.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that right-of-way sequencing at an intersection can be treated as an asymmetric open-loop traveling salesman problem over the eight NEMA phases, and that solving this sequencing problem on a quantum annealer yields lower stopped delay and travel time than solving the same QUBO with two classical heuristics or with a traditional actuated signal. The paper supports this with a quantum-in-the-loop testbed that connects SUMO to D-Wave: vehicle positions and speeds are read from the simulation, pairwise delay costs between consecutive phases are computed from estimated times of arrival, the annealer returns a phase order, and only the first phase is executed before the optimizer is called again. Across volumes of 35%, 70%, and 105% of capacity and VTL zone lengths of 50, 75, and 100 meters, the reported overall averages are 46 seconds of stopped delay for quantum annealing versus 91.1 for simulated annealing and 111.3 for hill climbing, with travel times of 115.3 versus 161.7 and 181.3 seconds. The authors also report that the method beats an actuated signal, with the largest gap at 105% capacity, where stopped delay drops from 123.4 to 53.9 seconds.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the right-of-way plan is a single ordering of the eight phases and that the delay of putting one phase before another is fully captured by pairwise stopped-delay estimates between consecutive phases, ignoring overlapping non-conflicting movements, queue spillback, and platoon dispersion; if that premise fails, the optimizer may lower a proxy rather than real delay.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Intersections can be controlled without fixed signal infrastructure, with the annealer generating phase and timing instructions directly from connected-vehicle data.
  • The same QUBO formulation drops unoccupied phases automatically, so the method adapts to lopsided demand at an intersection.
  • The annealer's processing time of about 197 ms per call supports real-time use; the current 2.99 s end-to-end latency is dominated by cloud upload, queue, and download.
  • The reported advantage over an actuated signal is largest at 105% of capacity, suggesting the biggest payoff under heavy congestion.
  • If quantum cloud queue times drop toward classical cloud levels, the method could meet the 1-second latency threshold for real-time mobility applications.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • A stronger test would compare the annealer's phase order against exhaustive search over all 8! phase orders in the same simulator; the paper does not report such a check, so the annealer's advantage over classical heuristics is not yet shown to be true optimality.
  • Because the system executes only the first phase of each returned sequence and then re-optimizes, the multi-phase tour acts as a greedy first-phase selection; the practical benefit may hinge on the first phase rather than on the full ordering.
  • The evaluation assumes full connected-vehicle penetration; extending the method to mixed traffic would require estimating ETAs and delay costs for non-CV vehicles from sensors or roadside units.
  • The same QUBO-AOTSP framing could coordinate multiple intersections or include pedestrian phases once cloud latency shrinks, directions the authors mention but do not test.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a Virtual Traffic Light (VTL) method for an isolated 8-phase intersection, formulated as an Asymmetric Open-Loop Traveling Salesman Problem mapped to a QUBO with 64 binary variables. The QUBO is solved on a D-Wave quantum annealer, and only the first phase of the returned sequence is executed before the optimizer is called again. The authors integrate SUMO with the D-Wave cloud to evaluate the method, comparing quantum annealing (QA) against binary hill climbing and D-Wave simulated annealing, and also against a traditional actuated signal. The reported results show that QA reduces stopped delay and travel time relative to the two classical heuristics under most tested traffic volumes and VTL-zone lengths, and that QA-based VTL outperforms an actuated signal in Table 3. The paper concludes that quantum annealing significantly reduces CV delays compared with classical optimization methods.

Significance. If the central claim is validated, this would be a useful demonstration of quantum annealing in a traffic-control application with a credible simulation testbed. The paper's concrete contributions include the SUMO–D-Wave integration, the full 8-phase NEMA formulation, and an explicit treatment of end-to-end latency, including an honest acknowledgement that current cloud queues exceed the 1-second real-time threshold. However, the current evidence does not establish the advertised advantage over 'classical optimization methods' because the only classical comparators are two stochastic heuristics, whereas the QUBO is small enough to be solved exactly by classical enumeration in well under a millisecond. The absence of an exact classical baseline, combined with unreported simulation replication counts, leaves the central quantitative claim unsupported as stated.

major comments (4)
  1. [§5.3 and §6.1.1] The comparison class for 'classical optimization methods' is too weak. The QUBO in Eq. (6) has only 64 binary variables, and the feasible set consists of permutations of at most 8 phases, i.e., at most 8! = 40,320 feasible phase orders; moreover, only the first phase of the solved sequence is executed before re-optimization. Binary Hill Climbing and D-Wave Simulated Annealing are stochastic heuristics whose performance depends on unstated hyperparameters, so beating them does not establish an advantage over classical optimization. An exact classical solver (e.g., enumeration or subset DP on the same d_ij model) is the natural baseline and would run in far less than a millisecond. The claim in §6.1.1 that 'quantum annealing consistently reduces delays for CVs compared to classical optimization methods' is therefore not established until such an exact baseline is benchmarked.
  2. [§6.1.1 and Table 1] The two-sample t-tests are reported with p-values but without the number of simulation replications, the total number of vehicles per condition, or the unit of observation (per-vehicle delays vs. per-run mean delays). These details are necessary to verify the statistical claims and to interpret the non-significant results at 35% capacity against simulated annealing. The authors should report the number of independent SUMO runs per condition and the sample sizes used in each t-test.
  3. [§4 (Eqs. (1)–(6) and first-phase rule)] The objective function minimized by the optimizer is the sum of pairwise delays over an entire 8-phase tour, but the controller executes only the first phase of that tour and then re-optimizes. The paper does not demonstrate that minimizing the full-tour cost with Eq. (3)–(6) actually minimizes the SUMO-measured delays, or that the first phase selected by the full-tour QUBO is superior to the first phase selected by an exact one-step or short-horizon policy. A correlation analysis between optimizer cost and measured SUMO delay, or an ablation comparing full-tour re-optimization with a simpler one-step greedy rule, is needed to validate the load-bearing modeling assumption.
  4. [§6.2 and Table 3] The comparison with the traditional actuated traffic signal reports only point estimates. For 35% and 70% capacity, the stopped-delay differences are small (2.6 s and 3.6 s, respectively), and no statistical test, number of replications, variance information, or description of the Synchro timing plans is provided. The claim that QA-based VTL 'outperforms traditional traffic control systems in all traffic volumes considered' is stronger than the evidence supports without error bars or significance testing.
minor comments (4)
  1. [§4, Eq. (6) paragraph] The text '264 possible choices' should read '2^64 possible choices'; the superscript formatting appears to have been lost.
  2. [Figure 6] The cost-function plot lacks error bars or a description of the distribution of optimizer costs, so the statement that QA has the 'lowest average cost function value of 0.22' is difficult to interpret without knowing the scale of the d_ij values.
  3. [Header/ACM Reference Format] The ACM reference-format placeholder block in the author header is a template artifact and should be removed or replaced with the actual formatted citation.
  4. [§5.3, §6.1.1] There are minor typos, including 'acr oss' in §6.1.1 and the stylized 'Comparably' at the start of a paragraph in §5.3; a careful proofread would improve readability.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the QUBO objective is built from ETAs, while delay and travel-time outcomes are measured independently in SUMO; the missing exact-classical baseline is a correctness risk, not a circular step.

full rationale

The paper's central comparison is not circular. Section 4 defines the QUBO objective (Eq. 6) from ETA-based pairwise delays d_ij (Eq. 1), and Section 6 evaluates stopped delay and travel time using SUMO with independent definitions ('total duration during which a vehicle's speed is below 0.1 meters per second'), so the reported QA advantage is an externally simulated outcome, not a restatement of the optimized objective. Both QA and the classical baselines (Binary Hill Climbing and D-Wave Simulated Annealing) solve the same QUBO; comparing their post-optimization cost values in Section 6.1.3 is a standard solver-quality check rather than a fitted-input prediction. The only self-citation of note is [12] in Section 6.3, used to argue that a 169 ms classical-cloud latency suggests future feasibility once quantum cloud infrastructure matures; that citation is a separately published, externally falsifiable measurement and is not load-bearing for the delay-reduction claim. The paper's own limitation, that current end-to-end latency is 2.99 s versus the 1 s real-time threshold, is stated openly and does not create circularity. A legitimate correctness concern is that the comparison class excludes an exact classical solver for the 8-phase permutation problem, so 'classical optimization methods' in the conclusion is broader than the two heuristics tested; that is a benchmarking gap, not a circular derivation.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central QUBO depends on the AOTSP mapping and the pairwise delay decomposition, both of which are modeling choices rather than derived facts. The hand-set penalty gamma, unreported Y/R values, and unstated baseline hyperparameters are the main free parameters. No new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (3)
  • gamma (Lagrange penalty) = 100
    Chosen in Eq. (6) to enforce the row and column constraints; the text says 'any positive number could be used'. It is a hand-set scalar, not fitted to data.
  • yellow and red intervals (Y, R) in Eq. (1) = not reported
    These constants enter every pairwise delay d_ij and therefore shape the QUBO, but their values are never stated in the paper, making the delay matrix non-reproducible.
  • hyperparameters of hill climbing and simulated annealing baselines = not reported
    Neighborhood size, iteration count, temperature schedule, and stopping criteria are not given, so the classical comparison is under-specified.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption The VTL problem maps to an Asymmetric Open-Loop TSP over the 8 NEMA phases, with each phase visited exactly once in a single permutation.
    Introduced in Section 4 when defining phases as cities and d_ij as edge costs; excludes concurrent non-conflicting phase combinations.
  • domain assumption Total stopped delay is the sum of pairwise delays between consecutive phases, where each d_ij depends only on the ETAs of vehicles in phases i and j (Eq. 1).
    Used in Eq. (3) and Eq. (6) as the objective; ignores spillback, platoon dispersion, and interactions beyond the immediate predecessor phase.
  • domain assumption All vehicles are connected vehicles with accurate BSM data, and there is no communication loss or latency in receiving SPaT instructions.
    The SUMO/D-Wave loop assumes lossless real-time data exchange; mixed traffic and packet loss are outside the model.
  • domain assumption A D-Wave annealer returns a valid low-energy readout of the embedded QUBO after annealing.
    The paper does not report embedding, chain breaks, or anneal counts; it treats the QPU output as directly usable.
  • standard math The QUBO-to-Ising transformation x_i = (1 + s_i)/2 is standard and lossless.
    Invoked in Section 4 with Eq. (7); this is a textbook linear change of variables.
  • domain assumption The actuated signal plan generated by Synchro is a representative traditional baseline.
    Used in Section 6.2 to claim superiority over conventional control; no sensitivity analysis of the Synchro timing is provided.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Quantum Annealing-Enhanced Virtual Traffic Lights and its Evaluation Using a Quantum-in-the-Loop Simulation Testbed." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/4PHF5SZG

@misc{pith2026241218776,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Quantum Annealing-Enhanced Virtual Traffic Lights and its Evaluation Using a Quantum-in-the-Loop Simulation Testbed},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/4PHF5SZG}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.18776}
}
read the original abstract

Virtual Traffic Light (VTL) is a traffic control method that does not require traffic signal-related infrastructure for roadway intersections. Connected vehicles (CVs) are given right-of-way based on prevailing traffic conditions, such as estimated times of arrival (ETAs) of vehicles, the number of CVs in different approaches, and their emissions. These factors are considered in line with the objectives of the VTL application. Aiming to optimize traffic flow by reducing delays, VTL generates Signal Phase and Timing (SPaT) data for CVs approaching an intersection. Our VTL method considers the delay each CV would cause for other CVs if given the right-of-way. However, the stochastic nature of vehicle arrivals at intersections increases the complexity of the optimization problem, making it challenging for classical computers to determine optimal solutions in real-time. To address this limitation, we develop a VTL method designed to minimize stopped delays for CVs at an intersection by leveraging the efficacies of existing quantum computers that determine the best outcome from all possible combinations. This method employs Quadratic Unconstrained Binary Optimization (QUBO), a mathematical framework commonly used in quantum computing, to formulate the VTL problem as a stopped-delay-minimization challenge. To evaluate our method for roadway traffic with varying traffic volumes, we integrate an open-source microscopic roadway traffic simulator, Simulation for Urban Mobility (SUMO), with a cloud-based D-Wave quantum computer. Our analysis reveals that our quantum computing-supported VTL outperforms the classical optimization-based VTL by significantly reducing stopped delays at intersections and travel time through the roadway sections crossing the intersections.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.18776 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Quantum tunneling to explore an energy landscape to search for the global minimum (adapted from [46]). 4 QUANTUM ANNEALING-SUPPORTED VTL METHOD The VTL problem in this study can be considered as an Asymmetric Open-Loop Traveling Salesman Problem (AOTSP). A Traveling Salesman Problem (TSP) is an optimization problem that involves finding the shortest route while visiting each city only once among the given cities and… view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

59 extracted references · 37 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Tanzina Afrin and Nita Yodo. 2020. A Survey of Road Traffic Congestion Measures towards a Sustainable and Resilient Transport ation System. Sustainability 12, 11 (June 2020), 4660. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12114660

    doi:10.3390/su12114660 2020

  2. [2]

    Sabbir Ahmed, Tamkin Mahmud Tan, Anna Mary Mondol, Zawad Alam, Noshin Nawal, and Jia Uddin. 2019. Automated Toll Collection S ystem Based on RFID Sensor. In 2019 International Carnahan Conference on Security Technology (ICCST) , October 2019. IEEE, CHENNAI, India, 1 –3. https://doi.org/10.1109/CCST.2019.8888429

    work page arXiv 2019

  3. [3]

    Akshay Ajagekar, Travis Humble, and Fengqi You. 2020. Quantum computing based hybrid solution strategies for large -scale discrete -continuous optimization problems. Computers & Chemical Engineering 132, (January 2020), 106630. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compchemeng.2019.106630

    work page arXiv 2020

  4. [4]

    Kalayci, and Alejandro Perdomo-Ortiz

    Javier Alcazar, Mohammad Ghazi vakili, Can B. Kalayci, and Alejandro Perdomo-Ortiz. 2022. Enhancing Combinatorial Optimization with Classical and Quantum Generative Models. https://doi.org/10.5281/ZENODO.10668479

    work page doi:10.5281/zenodo.10668479 2022

  5. [5]

    Jonito Aerts Arguëlles. 2018. The Heart of an Image: Quantum Superposition and Entanglement in Visual Perception. Found Sci 23, 4 (December 2018), 757–778. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10699-018-9547-1

    work page doi:10.1007/s10699-018-9547-1 2018

  6. [6]

    Alessandro Bazzi, Alberto Zanella, and Barbara M. Masini. 2016. A distributed virtual traffic light algorithm exploiting shor t range V2V communications. Ad Hoc Networks 49, (October 2016), 42–57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adhoc.2016.06.006

    work page doi:10.1016/j.adhoc.2016.06.006 2016

  7. [7]

    Christopher D. B. Bentley, Samuel Marsh, André R. R. Carvalho, Philip Kilby, and Michael J. Biercuk. 2022. Quantum computing for transport optimization. https://doi.org/10.48550/ARXIV.2206.07313

    arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2206.07313 2022

  8. [8]

    Rønnow, Sergei V

    Sergio Boixo, Troels F. Rønnow, Sergei V. Isakov, Zhihui Wang, David Wecker, Daniel A. Lidar, John M. Martinis, and Matthias Troyer. 2014. Evidence for quantum annealing with more than one hundred qubits. Nature Phys 10, 3 (March 2014), 218–224. https://doi.org/10.1038/nphys2900

    doi:10.1038/nphys2900 2014

Show all 59 references
  1. [9]

    Alex Halderman

    Ghena Branden, Beyer William, Hillaker Allen, Pevarnek Jonathan, and J. Alex Halderman. 2014. Green lights forever: Analyzing the security of traffic infrastructure. USENIX Association. Retrieved from https://www.usenix.org/system/files/conference/woot14/woot14 -ghena.pdf

    2014

  2. [10]

    Hock Hung Chieng and Noorhaniza Wahid. 2014. A Performance Comparison of Genetic Algorithm’s Mutation Operators in n -Cities Open Loop Travelling Salesman Problem. In Recent Advances on Soft Computing and Data Mining , Tutut Herawan, Rozaida Ghazali and Mustafa Mat Deris (eds....

    2014 doi

  3. [11]

    Nicola Cordeschi, Danilo Amendola, Mohammad Shojafar, and Enzo Baccarelli. 2015. Distributed and adaptive resource management in Cloud - assisted Cognitive Radio Vehicular Networks with hard reliability guarantees. Vehicular Communications 2, 1 (January 2015), 1 –12. https://d...

    2015 doi

  4. [12]

    Hsien-Wen Deng, Mizanur Rahman, Mashrur Chowdhury, M Sabbir Salek, and Mitch Shue. 2021. Commercial Cloud Computing for Connected Vehicle Applications in Transportation Cyberphysical Systems: A Case Study. IEEE Intell. Transport. Syst. Mag. 13, 1 (2021), 6 –19. https://doi.org...

    2021

  5. [13]

    Hsien-Wen Deng, M Sabbir Salek, Mizanur Rahman, Mashrur Chowdhury, Mitch Shue, and Amy W. Apon. 2025. Leveraging public cloud infrastructure for real-time connected vehicle speed advisory at a signalized corridor. International Journal of Transportation Science and Technology ...

    2025 doi

  6. [14]

    Djidjev, Guillaume Chapuis, Georg Hahn, and Guillaume Rizk

    Hristo N. Djidjev, Guillaume Chapuis, Georg Hahn, and Guillaume Rizk. 2018. Efficient Combinatorial Optimization Using Quantu m Annealing. (2018). https://doi.org/10.48550/ARXIV.1801.08653

    2018 doi arXiv

  7. [15]

    Vedran Dunjko and Hans J Briegel. 2018. Machine learning & artificial intelligence in the quantum domain: a review of recent progress. Rep. Prog. Phys. 81, 7 (July 2018), 074001. https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6633/aab406

    2018 doi

  8. [16]

    D-Wave Systems Inc. 2025. D -Wave System Overview. Retrieved May 8, 2025 from https://dwave -meta- doc.readthedocs.io/en/latest/overview/dwavesys.html

    2025

  9. [17]

    Abyad Enan, Abdullah Al Mamun, Jean Michel Tine, Judith Mwakalonge, Debbie Aisiana Indah, Gurcan Comert, and Mashrur Chowdhur y. 2024. Basic Safety Message Generation Through a Video-Based Analytics for Potential Safety Applications. ACM J. Auton. Transport. Syst. (January 202...

    2024 doi

  10. [18]

    Myungeun Eom and Byung-In Kim. 2020. The traffic signal control problem for intersections: a review. Eur. Transp. Res. Rev. 12, 1 (December 2020),

    2020

  11. [19]

    Tarawneh, Mohamed Elhoseny, J

    Ahmed Farouk, O. Tarawneh, Mohamed Elhoseny, J. Batle, Mosayeb Naseri, Aboul Ella Hassanien, and M. Abedl -Aty. 2018. Quantum Computing and Cryptography: An Overview. In Quantum Computing:An Environment for Intelligent Large Scale Real Application , Aboul Ella Hassanien, Moham...

    2018 doi

  12. [20]

    Walton Fehr. 2014. Southeast Michigan test bed: 2014 concept of operations. (December 2014). Retrieved December 8, 2024 from Available: https://trid.trb.org/view/1367354

    2014

  13. [21]

    Michel Ferreira, Ricardo Fernandes, Hugo Conceição, Wantanee Viriyasitavat, and Ozan K. Tonguz. 2010. Self -organized traffic control. In Proceedings of the seventh ACM international workshop on VehiculAr InterNETworking - VANET ’10, 2010. ACM Press, Chicago, Illinois, USA, 85...

    2010

  14. [22]

    Gian Giacomo Guerreschi and Mikhail Smelyanskiy. 2017. Practical optimization for hybrid quantum -classical algorithms. (2017). https://doi.org/10.48550/ARXIV.1701.01450

    2017 doi arXiv

  15. [23]

    Halkias and Michael Schauer

    John A. Halkias and Michael Schauer. 2004. RED LIGHT, GREEN LIGHT. Public roads 68, (November 2004), 44–47

    2004

  16. [24]

    Rønnow, Sergei V

    Bettina Heim, Troels F. Rønnow, Sergei V. Isakov, and Matthias Troyer. 2015. Quantum versus classical annealing of Ising spin glasses. Science 348, 6231 (April 2015), 215–217. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aaa4170

    2015 doi

  17. [25]

    Hasham Hussain, Muhammad Bin Javaid, Faisal Shah Khan, Archismita Dalal, and Aeysha Khalique. 2020. Optimal control of traffi c signals using quantum annealing. Quantum Inf Process 19, 9 (September 2020), 312. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11128 -020-02815-1

    2020 doi

  18. [26]

    Daisuke Inoue, Akihisa Okada, Tadayoshi Matsumori, Kazuyuki Aihara, and Hiroaki Yoshida. 2021. Traffic signal optimization on a square lattice with quantum annealing. Sci Rep 11, 1 (December 2021), 3303. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598 -021-82740-0

    2021 doi

  19. [27]

    Ernst Ising. 1925. Beitrag zur Theorie des Ferromagnetismus. Z. Physik 31, 1 (February 1925), 253–258. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02980577

    1925 doi

  20. [28]

    Aron Laszka, Bradley Potteiger, Yevgeniy Vorobeychik, Saurabh Amin, and Xenofon Koutsoukos. 2016. Vulnerability of Transporta tion Networks to Traffic -Signal Tampering. In 2016 ACM/IEEE 7th International Conference on Cyber -Physical Systems (ICCPS) , April 2016. IEEE, Vienna...

    2016

  21. [29]

    Joyoung Lee and Byungkyu Park. 2012. Development and Evaluation of a Cooperative Vehicle Intersection Control Algorithm Under the Connected Vehicles Environment. IEEE Trans. Intell. Transport. Syst. 13, 1 (March 2012), 81–90. https://doi.org/10.1109/TITS.2011.2178836

    2012

  22. [30]

    Andrew Lemon. 2024. Traffic Light Security Flaw: Hackers Could Cause Chaos, Says Researcher. Traffic Light Security Flaw: Hackers Could Cause Chaos, Says Researcher . Retrieved May 8, 2025 from https://www.techtimes.com/articles/306743/20240718/traffic -light-security-flaw-hac...

    2024

  23. [31]

    Mark Lewis and Fred Glover. 2017. Quadratic unconstrained binary optimization problem preprocessing: Theory and empirical analysis. Networks 70, 2 (September 2017), 79–97. https://doi.org/10.1002/net.21751

    2017 doi

  24. [32]

    Shen Lin. 1965. Computer Solutions of the Traveling Salesman Problem. Bell System Technical Journal 44, 10 (December 1965), 2245 –2269. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1538-7305.1965.tb04146.x

    1965

  25. [33]

    McGeoch and Cong Wang

    Catherine C. McGeoch and Cong Wang. 2013. Experimental evaluation of an adiabiatic quantum system for combinatorial optimizat ion. In Proceedings of the ACM International Conference on Computing Frontiers , May 14, 2013. ACM, Ischia Italy, 1 –11. https://doi.org/10.1145/248276...

    2013

  26. [34]

    Florian Neukart, Gabriele Compostella, Christian Seidel, David von Dollen, Sheir Yarkoni, and Bob Parney. 2017. Traffic Flow Optimization Using a Quantum Annealer. Front. ICT 4, (December 2017), 29. https://doi.org/10.3389/fict.2017.00029

    2017

  27. [35]

    Kuban Altınel, and Gilbert Laporte

    Temel Öncan, İ. Kuban Altınel, and Gilbert Laporte. 2009. A comparative analysis of several asymmetric traveling salesman pro blem formulations. Computers & Operations Research 36, 3 (March 2009), 637–654. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cor.2007.11.008

    2009 doi

  28. [36]

    Román Orús, Samuel Mugel, and Enrique Lizaso. 2019. Quantum computing for finance: Overview and prospects. Reviews in Physics 4, (November 2019), 100028. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.revip.2019.100028

    2019

  29. [37]

    Ozcan and H

    S.C. Ozcan and H. Kaya. 2018. An Analysis of Travelling Salesman Problem Utilizing Hill Climbing Algorithm for a Smart City T ouristic Search on OpenStreetMap (OSM). In 2018 2nd International Symposium on Multidisciplinary Studies and Innovative Technologies (ISMSIT) , October...

    2018

  30. [38]

    Prassas and Roger P

    Elena S. Prassas and Roger P. Roess. 2020. Signalized Intersections: 1985 Through 2000. In The Highway Capacity Manual: A Conceptual and Research History Volume 2. Springer International Publishing, Cham, 165–226. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-34480-1_8

    2020 doi

  31. [39]

    Quantum Technology and Application Consortium – QUTAC, Andreas Bayerstadler, Guillaume Becquin, Julia Binder, Thierry Botter, Hans Ehm, Thomas Ehmer, Marvin Erdmann, Norbert Gaus, Philipp Harbach, Maximilian Hess, Johannes Klepsch, Martin Leib, Sebastian Luber, Andre Luckow, M...

    2021

  32. [40]

    Mokhlesur Rahman, Pooya Najaf, Milton Gregory Fields, and Jean -Claude Thill

    Md. Mokhlesur Rahman, Pooya Najaf, Milton Gregory Fields, and Jean -Claude Thill. 2022. Traffic congestion and its urban scale factors: Empirical evidence from American urban areas. International Journal of Sustainable Transportation 16, 5 (May 2022), 406 –421. https://doi.org...

    2022

  33. [41]

    P. Ray, B. K. Chakrabarti, and Arunava Chakrabarti. 1989. Sherrington-Kirkpatrick model in a transverse field: Absence of replica symmetry breaking due to quantum fluctuations. Phys. Rev. B 39, 16 (June 1989), 11828–11832. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.39.11828

    1989 doi

  34. [42]

    Rønnow, Zhihui Wang, Joshua Job, Sergio Boixo, Sergei V

    Troels F. Rønnow, Zhihui Wang, Joshua Job, Sergio Boixo, Sergei V. Isakov, David Wecker, John M. Martinis, Daniel A. Lidar, and Matthias Troyer

  35. [43]

    Rutenbar

    R.A. Rutenbar. 1989. Simulated annealing algorithms: an overview. IEEE Circuits Devices Mag. 5, 1 (January 1989), 19 –26. https://doi.org/10.1109/101.17235

    1989 doi

  36. [44]

    M Sabbir Salek, Sakib Mahmud Khan, Mizanur Rahman, Hsien -Wen Deng, Mhafuzul Islam, Zadid Khan, Mahsrur Chowdhury, and Mitch Shue

  37. [45]

    Patti, Diego García -Martín, Giancarlo Camilo, Anima Anandkumar, and Leandro Aolita

    Marco Sciorilli, Lucas Borges, Taylor L. Patti, Diego García -Martín, Giancarlo Camilo, Anima Anandkumar, and Leandro Aolita. 2025. Towards large-scale quantum optimization solvers with few qubits. Nat Commun 16, 1 (January 2025), 476. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467 -024-55346-z

    2025 doi

  38. [46]

    Silevitch, T.F

    D.M. Silevitch, T.F. Rosenbaum, and G. Aeppli. 2015. Quantum tunneling vs. thermal effects in experiments on adiabatic quantu m computing. Eur. Phys. J. Spec. Top. 224, 1 (February 2015), 25–34. https://doi.org/10.1140/epjst/e2015-02340-6

    2015 doi

  39. [47]

    Pritpal Singh and Surya Sekhar Bose. 2021. A quantum -clustering optimization method for COVID -19 CT scan image segmentation. Expert Systems with Applications 185, (December 2021), 115637. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2021.115637

    2021

  40. [48]

    TripInfo

    SUMO. TripInfo. TripInfo. Retrieved from https://sumo.dlr.de/docs/Simulation/Output/TripInfo.html

  41. [49]

    Eiichi Taniguchi and Hiroshi Shimamoto. 2004. Intelligent transportation system based dynamic vehicle routing and scheduling with variable travel times. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies 12, 3–4 (June 2004), 235–250. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trc.2004.07.007

    2004 doi

  42. [50]

    https://doi.org/10.1186/s12544-020-00440-8

    doi

  43. [51]

    Tom Urbanik, Alison Tanaka, Bailey Lozner, Eric Lindstrom, Kevin Lee, Shaun Quayle, Scott Beaird, Shing Tsoi, Paul Ryus, Doug Gettman, Srinivasa Sunkari, Kevin Balke, Darcy Bullock, National Cooperative Highway Research Program, Transportation Research Bo ard, and National Aca...

    2015 doi

  44. [52]

    Yizhe Wang, Xiaoguang Yang, Hailun Liang, and Yangdong Liu. 2018. A Review of the Self-Adaptive Traffic Signal Control System Based on Future Traffic Environment. Journal of Advanced Transportation 2018, (June 2018), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/1096123

    2018 doi

  45. [53]

    Brown, and Constantin F

    Ioannis Tsamardinos, Laura E. Brown, and Constantin F. Aliferis. 2006. The max -min hill-climbing Bayesian network structure learning algorithm. Mach Learn 65, 1 (October 2006), 31–78. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10994-006-6889-7

    2006 doi

  46. [54]

    Rusheng Zhang, Frank Schmutz, Kyle Gerard, Aurelicn Pomini, Louis Basseto, Sami Ben Hassen, Akihiro Ishikawa, Inci Ozgunes, and Ozan Tonguz

  47. [55]

    V2X Communications Message Set Dictionary

    2023. V2X Communications Message Set Dictionary. Retrieved from https://www.sae.org/standards/content/j2735_202309/ Submitted June 2025

    2023

  48. [56]

    Ryota Yasudo, Koji Nakano, Yasuaki Ito, Ryota Katsuki, Yusuke Tabata, Takashi Yazane, and Kenichiro Hamano. 2022. GPU -accelerated scalable solver with bit permutated cyclic-min algorithm for quadratic unconstrained binary optimization. Journal of Parallel and Distributed Comp...

    2022 doi

  49. [2014]

    Science 345, 6195 (July 2014), 420–424

    Defining and detecting quantum speedup. Science 345, 6195 (July 2014), 420–424. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1252319

    2014 doi

  50. [2018]

    In 2018 IEEE 88th Vehicular Technology Conference (VTC -Fall), August 2018

    Virtual Traffic Lights: System Design and Implementation. In 2018 IEEE 88th Vehicular Technology Conference (VTC -Fall), August 2018. IEEE, Chicago, IL, USA, 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1109/VTCFall.2018.8690709

    2018

  51. [2022]

    IEEE Internet Things J

    A Review on Cybersecurity of Cloud Computing for Supporting Connected Vehicle Applications. IEEE Internet Things J. 9, 11 (June 2022), 8250–8268. https://doi.org/10.1109/JIOT.2022.3152477

    2022

Pith tools

Reviewed August 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.