On the Controversy around Daganzo's Requiem for and Aw-Rascle's Resurrection of Second-Order Traffic Flow Models
Dirk Helbing, Anders Johansson

TL;DR
This paper critically examines second-order traffic flow models, analyzing their stability and characteristic speeds, and discusses the theoretical inconsistencies claimed in the literature, providing new insights through comparisons of different models.
Contribution
It offers a detailed stability analysis of traffic models, clarifies the interpretation of characteristic speeds, and compares various models to address existing controversies.
Findings
Most macroscopic models predict two characteristic speeds, one exceeding average traffic velocity.
The claimed inconsistency of super-velocity characteristic speeds is critically examined.
Comparisons between different traffic models shed light on their stability and physical plausibility.
Abstract
Daganzo's criticisms of second-order fluid approximations of traffic flow [C. Daganzo, Transpn. Res. B. 29, 277-286 (1995)] and Aw and Rascle's proposal how to overcome them [A. Aw and M. Rascle, SIAM J. Appl. Math. 60, 916-938 (2000)] have stimulated an intensive scientific activity in the field of traffic modeling. Here, we will revisit their arguments and the interpretations behind them. We will start by analyzing the linear stability of traffic models, which is a widely established approach to study the ability of traffic models to describe emergent traffic jams. Besides deriving a collection of useful formulas for stability analyses, the main attention is put on the characteristic speeds, which are related to the group velocities of the linearized model equations. Most macroscopic traffic models with a dynamic velocity equation appear to predict two characteristic speeds, one of…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
