pith. sign in

arxiv: 2606.30694 · v1 · pith:CUJVMQMJnew · submitted 2026-06-29 · 💻 cs.RO · cs.AI

DSIP: A Dynamic Coordination Planner for Signal-Free Intersections using Diffusion-Model-Based Multi-Agent Motion Planning

Qian Hu , Haoyang Peng , Songan Zhang , Ming Yang , Hongtei Eric Tseng This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-07-01 02:12 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 💻 cs.RO cs.AI
keywords signal-free intersectionsdiffusion modelsmulti-agent motion planningconnected automated vehiclestrajectory optimizationtraffic coordinationSUMO simulation
0
0 comments X

The pith

DSIP uses a diffusion model to coordinate connected vehicles at intersections without traffic signals, cutting average delay and raising speeds versus fixed signals or reinforcement learning controllers.

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

The paper introduces DSIP, a multi-agent motion planning system that replaces discrete traffic signal phases with continuous trajectory optimization generated by a diffusion process. It evaluates this approach in SUMO simulations across four-leg intersections and shows clear gains in delay reduction and speed maintenance, most pronounced in medium- to high-density traffic. A reader would care because the method promises to unlock latent road capacity through computation alone rather than added lanes or hardware. The work isolates the core benefit by testing under idealized communication and perfect execution so that any measured improvement can be attributed to the diffusion-driven coordination itself.

Core claim

DSIP replaces phase-based signal control with a generative diffusion process that produces coordinated, continuous trajectories for multiple connected and automated vehicles, and under idealized conditions this yields lower average delay and higher average speeds than both fixed-time control and state-of-the-art reinforcement-learning controllers, especially as traffic density increases.

What carries the argument

The diffusion-model-based multi-agent motion planning framework that generates joint trajectories for connected vehicles to enable signal-free intersection passage.

If this is right

  • Average vehicle delay drops relative to fixed-time signals and reinforcement-learning baselines in medium- and high-density flows.
  • Average travel speed stays higher than the comparison methods across the tested densities.
  • The diffusion-based planner supplies a scalable foundation for future autonomous intersection management.
  • Coordination is achieved without physical infrastructure changes, offering a software-only route to higher intersection throughput.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The same diffusion planner could be extended to mixed fleets containing human-driven vehicles whose behavior must be predicted rather than controlled.
  • Real-time replanning frequency would need to be measured to determine whether the method remains practical on embedded vehicle hardware.
  • Integration with existing adaptive signal systems could serve as a transitional step before full signal removal.

Load-bearing premise

The performance gains are measured under idealized communication and perfect execution with no delays or errors.

What would settle it

A controlled simulation or field test that adds realistic communication latency or execution noise and measures whether the reported delay reductions remain.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2606.30694 by Haoyang Peng, Hongtei Eric Tseng, Ming Yang, Qian Hu, Songan Zhang.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Inherent limitations of typical intersection management schemes and the core framework of this work: (a) Uncoordinated driving of connected and [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Average time loss under medium traffic density on a two-way four [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Average speed under various traffic densities on a two-way four-lane [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Average speed under various traffic densities on a two-way six-lane [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Average speed under various traffic densities on a two-way eight-lane [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Temporal evolution of traffic states under different control strategies at a four-leg intersection. The experimental scenario shown in the snapshots [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_8.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Traffic signal control at urban intersections inherently introduces stop-and-go behavior, resulting in increased delays and reduced traffic efficiency, especially under high traffic demand. With the emergence of connected and automated vehicles (CAVs), trajectory-level coordination has emerged as a high-potential strategy to augment or transcend conventional phase-based management. This paper proposes DSIP (Diffusion-model-based Signal-free Intersection Planner), a multi-agent motion planning framework driven by a generative diffusion process. DSIP shifts the intersection management paradigm from discrete temporal phasing to continuous multi-vehicle trajectory optimization. This work evaluates the theoretical upper-bound performance of this coordination strategy under idealized communication and execution conditions to isolate the core benefits of the diffusion-driven approach. Using the SUMO platform, we evaluate DSIP across diverse four-leg intersection configurations. Experimental results demonstrate that DSIP significantly reduces average delay and maintains higher average speed compared to both fixed-time signal control and state-of-the-art reinforcement-learning-based controllers, particularly in medium- to high-density traffic. These findings suggest that diffusion-based trajectory planning provides a scalable and robust foundation for future autonomous intersection management. By unlocking latent intersection capacity through software-defined coordination, this approach offers a cost-effective pathway to improve urban traffic flow efficiency without requiring physical infrastructure expansion.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

1 major / 0 minor

Summary. The paper proposes DSIP, a diffusion-model-based multi-agent motion planning framework for signal-free intersections that replaces discrete phase-based control with continuous trajectory optimization. It evaluates the theoretical upper-bound performance of this approach under idealized communication and execution conditions in SUMO simulations across diverse four-leg intersections, claiming significant reductions in average delay and higher average speeds relative to fixed-time signal control and state-of-the-art RL-based controllers, especially in medium- to high-density traffic.

Significance. If the empirical claims are substantiated with detailed quantitative results and validation procedures, the work could establish a useful theoretical benchmark for diffusion-driven coordination in autonomous intersection management. The explicit scoping to idealized conditions to isolate core benefits is a constructive framing that allows clear comparison to baselines without overclaiming real-world applicability.

major comments (1)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: The central claim that 'DSIP significantly reduces average delay and maintains higher average speed' is presented without any quantitative metrics, tables, figures, training details, or validation procedures in the provided manuscript text. This absence makes the empirical comparison to fixed-time and RL baselines unevaluable and load-bearing for the paper's contribution.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their constructive feedback, which highlights an important opportunity to strengthen the presentation of our empirical results. We address the single major comment below.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: The central claim that 'DSIP significantly reduces average delay and maintains higher average speed' is presented without any quantitative metrics, tables, figures, training details, or validation procedures in the provided manuscript text. This absence makes the empirical comparison to fixed-time and RL baselines unevaluable and load-bearing for the paper's contribution.

    Authors: We agree that the abstract would be more informative and evaluable if it included key quantitative metrics. The main body of the manuscript already contains the full set of results, including tables and figures with average delay reductions, speed improvements, and comparisons to fixed-time signals and RL baselines across traffic densities, along with details on the SUMO simulation setup, idealized conditions, and validation procedures. To address the referee's point, we will revise the abstract to incorporate specific quantitative highlights (e.g., percentage reductions in average delay and speed gains in medium- to high-density scenarios) while preserving brevity. This change will make the central claims immediately assessable without altering the paper's scope or idealized framing. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity identified

full rationale

The paper presents DSIP as a diffusion-model-based multi-agent planner and evaluates its performance empirically via SUMO simulations under explicitly idealized communication and execution conditions. The central claims consist of direct comparisons of average delay and speed against fixed-time and RL baselines; no equations, fitted parameters, or self-citations are shown that would reduce these metrics to inputs by construction or import uniqueness via author prior work. The derivation chain is therefore self-contained as an empirical demonstration rather than a closed definitional loop.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

Abstract-only text supplies no explicit free parameters, axioms, or invented entities; the diffusion process itself is treated as a standard generative technique imported from prior literature.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5761 in / 1076 out tokens · 36530 ms · 2026-07-01T02:12:12.706503+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

47 extracted references

  1. [1]

    Development of VT- Micro model for estimating hot stabilized light duty vehicle and truck emissions,

    H. Rakha, K. Ahn, and A. Trani, “Development of VT- Micro model for estimating hot stabilized light duty vehicle and truck emissions,” Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment , vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 49–74, Jan. 2004

    2004

  2. [2]

    Real-world fuel consumption and CO2 (carbon dioxide) emissions by driving conditions for light-duty passenger vehicles in China,

    S. Zhang, Y . Wu, H. Liu, R. Huang, P . Un, Y . Zhou, L. Fu, and J. Hao, “Real-world fuel consumption and CO2 (carbon dioxide) emissions by driving conditions for light-duty passenger vehicles in China,” Energy, vol. 69, pp. 247–257, May 2014

    2014

  3. [3]

    Energy con- sumption of electric vehicles based on real-world driving patterns: A case study of Beijing,

    H. Wang, X. Zhang, and M. Ouyang, “Energy con- sumption of electric vehicles based on real-world driving patterns: A case study of Beijing,” Applied Energy , vol. 157, pp. 710–719, Nov. 2015

    2015

  4. [4]

    Prediction-Based Eco-Approach and Depar- ture at Signalized Intersections With Speed Forecasting on Preceding V ehicles,

    F. Y e, P . Hao, X. Qi, G. Wu, K. Boriboonsomsin, and M. J. Barth, “Prediction-Based Eco-Approach and Depar- ture at Signalized Intersections With Speed Forecasting on Preceding V ehicles,”IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems , vol. 20, no. 4, pp. 1378–1389, Apr. 2019

    2019

  5. [5]

    Traffic signal settings,

    F. V . Webster, “Traffic signal settings,” Road Research Laboratory, London, U.K., Road Research Technical Paper 39, 1958, her Majesty’s Stationery Office

    1958

  6. [6]

    5-A Survey on Reinforcement Learning Models and Algorithms for Traffic Signal Control,

    K.-L. A. Y au, J. Qadir, H. L. Khoo, M. H. Ling, and P . Komisarczuk, “5-A Survey on Reinforcement Learning Models and Algorithms for Traffic Signal Control,” ACM Comput. Surv., vol. 50, no. 3, pp. 34:1–34:38, Jun. 2017

    2017

  7. [7]

    IntelliLight: A Reinforcement Learning Approach for Intelligent Traffic Light Control,

    H. Wei, G. Zheng, H. Y ao, and Z. Li, “IntelliLight: A Reinforcement Learning Approach for Intelligent Traffic Light Control,” in Proceedings of the 24th ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery & Data Mining , ser. KDD ’18. New Y ork, NY , USA: Association for Computing Machinery, Jul. 2018, pp. 2496–2505

    2018

  8. [8]

    Cooperative Deep Reinforcement Learning for Large- Scale Traffic Grid Signal Control,

    T. Tan, F. Bao, Y . Deng, A. Jin, Q. Dai, and J. Wang, “Cooperative Deep Reinforcement Learning for Large- Scale Traffic Grid Signal Control,” IEEE Transactions on Cybernetics, vol. 50, no. 6, pp. 2687–2700, Jun. 2020

    2020

  9. [9]

    Control of con- nected and automated vehicles: State of the art and future challenges,

    J. Guanetti, Y . Kim, and F. Borrelli, “Control of con- nected and automated vehicles: State of the art and future challenges,” Annual Reviews in Control , vol. 45, pp. 18– 40, 2018

    2018

  10. [10]

    A Survey of Security and Privacy Issues in V2X Communication Systems,

    T. Y oshizawa, D. Singelée, J. T. Muehlberg, S. Delbruel, A. Taherkordi, D. Hughes, and B. Preneel, “A Survey of Security and Privacy Issues in V2X Communication Systems,” ACM Comput. Surv., vol. 55, no. 9, pp. 185:1– JOURNAL OF LATEX CLASS FILES, VOL. 14, NO. 8, AUGUST 2021 12 185:36, Jan. 2023

    2021

  11. [11]

    10-A Virtual Spring Strategy for Cooperative Control of Connected and Automated V ehicles at Signal- Free Intersections,

    J. Gong, Y . Zhao, J. Cao, J. Guo, M. Abdel-Aty, and W. Huang, “10-A Virtual Spring Strategy for Cooperative Control of Connected and Automated V ehicles at Signal- Free Intersections,” IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems , vol. 25, no. 2, pp. 1430–1444, Feb. 2024

    2024

  12. [12]

    A vehicle-intersection coordination scheme for smooth flows of traffic without using traffic lights,

    M. A. S. Kamal, J.-i. Imura, T. Hayakawa, A. Ohata, and K. Aihara, “A vehicle-intersection coordination scheme for smooth flows of traffic without using traffic lights,” IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems, vol. 16, no. 3, pp. 1136–1147, 2015

    2015

  13. [13]

    A decentralized energy-optimal control framework for connected automated vehicles at signal-free intersec- tions,

    A. A. Malikopoulos, C. G. Cassandras, and Y . J. Zhang, “A decentralized energy-optimal control framework for connected automated vehicles at signal-free intersec- tions,” Automatica, vol. 93, pp. 244–256, 2018

    2018

  14. [14]

    Development and evaluation of a cooperative vehicle intersection control algorithm under the connected vehicles environment,

    J. Lee and B. Park, “Development and evaluation of a cooperative vehicle intersection control algorithm under the connected vehicles environment,” IEEE transactions on intelligent transportation systems , vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 81–90, 2012

    2012

  15. [15]

    Distributed conflict-free cooperation for mul- tiple connected vehicles at unsignalized intersections,

    B. Xu, S. E. Li, Y . Bian, S. Li, X. J. Ban, J. Wang, and K. Li, “Distributed conflict-free cooperation for mul- tiple connected vehicles at unsignalized intersections,” Transportation research part C: emerging technologies , vol. 93, pp. 322–334, 2018

    2018

  16. [16]

    SUMO – Simulation of Urban MObility,

    M. Behrisch, L. Bieker, J. Erdmann, and D. Krajzewicz, “SUMO – Simulation of Urban MObility,” SIMUL 2011 : The Third International Conference on Advances in System Simulation , 2011

    2011

  17. [17]

    Scoot-a traffic responsive method of coordinating sig- nals,

    P . Hunt, D. Robertson, R. Bretherton, and R. Winton, “Scoot-a traffic responsive method of coordinating sig- nals,” Transport and Road Research Laboratory (TRRL), Tech. Rep., 1981

    1981

  18. [18]

    The Sydney coordinated adaptive traffic (SCA T) system philosophy and benefits,

    A. Sims and K. Dobinson, “The Sydney coordinated adaptive traffic (SCA T) system philosophy and benefits,” IEEE Transactions on V ehicular Technology , vol. 29, no. 2, pp. 130–137, May 1980

    1980

  19. [19]

    Transyt: a traffic network study tool,

    D. I. Robertson, “Transyt: a traffic network study tool,” Road Research Laboratory /UK, Tech. Rep., 1969

    1969

  20. [20]

    Group-based optimisation of signal timings using the TRANSYT traffic model,

    S. Wong, “Group-based optimisation of signal timings using the TRANSYT traffic model,” Transportation Re- search Part B: Methodological , vol. 30, no. 3, pp. 217– 244, Jun. 1996

    1996

  21. [21]

    The prodyn real time traffic algorithm,

    J.-J. Henry, J. L. Farges, and J. Tuffal, “The prodyn real time traffic algorithm,” in Control in transportation systems. Elsevier, 1984, pp. 305–310

    1984

  22. [22]

    Coordinated deep reinforcement learners for traffic light control,

    E. V an der Pol and F. A. Oliehoek, “Coordinated deep reinforcement learners for traffic light control,” Proceed- ings of learning, inference and control of multi-agent systems (at NIPS 2016) , vol. 8, pp. 21–38, 2016

    2016

  23. [23]

    Traffic signal control with deep reinforcement learning,

    T. Zhao, P . Wang, and S. Li, “Traffic signal control with deep reinforcement learning,” in 2019 International Conference on Intelligent Computing, Automation and Systems (ICICAS) . IEEE, 2019, pp. 763–767

    2019

  24. [24]

    Toward a thousand lights: Decentral- ized deep reinforcement learning for large-scale traffic signal control,

    C. Chen, H. Wei, N. Xu, G. Zheng, M. Y ang, Y . Xiong, K. Xu, and Z. Li, “Toward a thousand lights: Decentral- ized deep reinforcement learning for large-scale traffic signal control,” in Proceedings of the AAAI conference on artificial intelligence , vol. 34, no. 04, 2020, pp. 3414– 3421

    2020

  25. [25]

    Colight: Learning network-level cooperation for traffic signal control,

    H. Wei, N. Xu, H. Zhang, G. Zheng, X. Zang, C. Chen, W. Zhang, Y . Zhu, K. Xu, and Z. Li, “Colight: Learning network-level cooperation for traffic signal control,” in Proceedings of the 28th ACM International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management , ser. CIKM ’19, 2019

    2019

  26. [26]

    Leveraging queue length and attention mechanisms for enhanced traffic signal control optimization,

    L. Zhang, S. Xie, and J. Deng, “Leveraging queue length and attention mechanisms for enhanced traffic signal control optimization,” in Joint European Confer- ence on Machine Learning and Knowledge Discovery in Databases. Springer, 2023, pp. 141–156

    2023

  27. [27]

    A Formal Basis for the Heuristic Determination of Minimum Cost Paths,

    P . E. Hart, N. J. Nilsson, and B. Raphael, “A Formal Basis for the Heuristic Determination of Minimum Cost Paths,” IEEE Transactions on Systems Science and Cy- bernetics, vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 100–107, Jul. 1968

    1968

  28. [28]

    D* lite,

    S. Koenig and M. Likhachev, “D* lite,” in Eighteenth national conference on Artificial intelligence , 2002, pp. 476–483

    2002

  29. [29]

    Probabilistic roadmaps for path planning in high- dimensional configuration spaces,

    L. Kavraki, P . Svestka, J.-C. Latombe, and M. Over- mars, “Probabilistic roadmaps for path planning in high- dimensional configuration spaces,” IEEE Transactions on Robotics and Automation , vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 566–580, Aug. 1996

    1996

  30. [30]

    Rapidly-exploring random trees: A new tool for path planning,

    S. LaV alle, “Rapidly-exploring random trees: A new tool for path planning,” Research Report 9811 , 1998

    1998

  31. [31]

    Sampling-based algorithms for optimal motion planning,

    S. Karaman and E. Frazzoli, “Sampling-based algorithms for optimal motion planning,” The international journal of robotics research , vol. 30, no. 7, pp. 846–894, 2011

    2011

  32. [32]

    Multi-agent pathfinding: Definitions, variants, and benchmarks,

    R. Stern, N. Sturtevant, A. Felner, S. Koenig, H. Ma, T. Walker, J. Li, D. Atzmon, L. Cohen, T. Kumar et al. , “Multi-agent pathfinding: Definitions, variants, and benchmarks,” in Proceedings of the International Symposium on Combinatorial Search , vol. 10, no. 1, 2019, pp. 151–158

    2019

  33. [33]

    Conflict-based search for optimal multi-agent pathfind- ing,

    G. Sharon, R. Stern, A. Felner, and N. R. Sturtevant, “Conflict-based search for optimal multi-agent pathfind- ing,” Artificial Intelligence , vol. 219, pp. 40–66, Feb. 2015

    2015

  34. [34]

    AL VINN: An Autonomous Land V ehicle in a Neural Network,

    D. A. Pomerleau, “AL VINN: An Autonomous Land V ehicle in a Neural Network,” in Advances in Neu- ral Information Processing Systems , vol. 1. Morgan- Kaufmann, 1988

    1988

  35. [35]

    Apprenticeship learning via inverse reinforcement learning,

    P . Abbeel and A. Y . Ng, “Apprenticeship learning via inverse reinforcement learning,” in Proceedings of the twenty-first international conference on Machine learn- ing, 2004, p. 1

    2004

  36. [36]

    Generative Adversarial Imitation Learning,

    J. Ho and S. Ermon, “Generative Adversarial Imitation Learning,” in Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, vol. 29. Curran Associates, Inc., 2016

    2016

  37. [37]

    Motion Planning Diffusion: Learning and Planning of Robot Motions with Diffusion Models,

    J. Carvalho, A. T. Le, M. Baierl, D. Koert, and J. Pe- ters, “Motion Planning Diffusion: Learning and Planning of Robot Motions with Diffusion Models,” in 2023 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS) , Oct. 2023, pp. 1916–1923

    2023

  38. [38]

    MotionDiffuser: Controllable Multi-Agent Motion Prediction Using Diffusion,

    C. M. Jiang, A. Cornman, C. Park, B. Sapp, Y . Zhou, and JOURNAL OF LATEX CLASS FILES, VOL. 14, NO. 8, AUGUST 2021 13 D. Anguelov, “MotionDiffuser: Controllable Multi-Agent Motion Prediction Using Diffusion,” in 2023 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR). V ancouver, BC, Canada: IEEE, Jun. 2023, pp. 9644–9653

    2021

  39. [39]

    Diffusion policy: Visuo- motor policy learning via action diffusion,

    C. Chi, Z. Xu, S. Feng, E. Cousineau, Y . Du, B. Burch- fiel, R. Tedrake, and S. Song, “Diffusion policy: Visuo- motor policy learning via action diffusion,” The Interna- tional Journal of Robotics Research , vol. 44, no. 10-11, pp. 1684–1704, 2025

    2025

  40. [40]

    Primal: Pathfinding via reinforcement and imitation multi-agent learning,

    G. Sartoretti, J. Kerr, Y . Shi, G. Wagner, T. S. Kumar, S. Koenig, and H. Choset, “Primal: Pathfinding via reinforcement and imitation multi-agent learning,” IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters , vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 2378– 2385, 2019

    2019

  41. [41]

    Multi-robot motion planning with diffusion models,

    Y . Shaoul, I. Mishani, S. V ats, J. Li, and M. Likhachev, “Multi-robot motion planning with diffusion models,” in The Thirteenth International Conference on Learning Representations, 2025

    2025

  42. [42]

    Highway capacity manual 2010,

    M. R. Morris, J. B. Barker, A. D. Biehler, P . H. Appel, and R. M. Brewster, “Highway capacity manual 2010,” Transportation Research Board, Tech. Rep., 2010

    2010

  43. [43]

    Reg- ulations for the implementation of the road traffic safety law of the people’s republic of china,

    State Council of the People’s Republic of China, “Reg- ulations for the implementation of the road traffic safety law of the people’s republic of china,” Beijing, China, 2004, article 45, effective since May 1, 2004

    2004

  44. [44]

    GB 51 286-2018, 2018

    Code for Design of Urban Road Engineering , Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development of the People’s Republic of China Std. GB 51 286-2018, 2018

    2018

  45. [45]

    SUMO’s Lane-Changing Model,

    J. Erdmann, “SUMO’s Lane-Changing Model,” in Mod- eling Mobility with Open Data , M. Behrisch and M. We- ber, Eds. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2015, pp. 105–123

    2015

  46. [46]

    PlainXML - SUMO Documentation,

    SUMO, “PlainXML - SUMO Documentation,” https://sumo.dlr.de/docs/Networks/PlainXML.html

  47. [47]

    Multiagent traffic management: A reservation-based intersection control mechanism,

    K. Dresner and P . Stone, “Multiagent traffic management: A reservation-based intersection control mechanism,” in Proceedings of the Third International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems-V olume 2, 2004, pp. 530–537. Qian Hu is a sophomore at the Global Institute of Future Technology (GIFT), Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shangha...

    2004