Three-phase traffic theory and two-phase models with a fundamental diagram in the light of empirical stylized facts
Martin Treiber, Arne Kesting, Dirk Helbing

TL;DR
This paper compares three-phase traffic theory with two-phase models, showing that similar traffic patterns can be reproduced by both, and emphasizes the importance of precise terminology and model-data comparison for understanding traffic congestion.
Contribution
It demonstrates that two-phase models can replicate three-phase traffic patterns when parameters and real-world factors are properly considered, bridging the gap between the theories.
Findings
Both models can reproduce empirical traffic patterns.
Model parameters and real-world factors influence traffic pattern reproduction.
Clarifying terminology can reduce controversy in traffic modeling.
Abstract
Despite the availability of large empirical data sets and the long history of traffic modeling, the theory of traffic congestion on freeways is still highly controversial. In this contribution, we compare Kerner's three-phase traffic theory with the phase diagram approach for traffic models with a fundamental diagram. We discuss the inconsistent use of the term "traffic phase" and show that patterns demanded by three-phase traffic theory can be reproduced with simple two-phase models, if the model parameters are suitably specified and factors characteristic for real traffic flows are considered, such as effects of noise or heterogeneity or the actual freeway design (e.g. combinations of off- and on-ramps). Conversely, we demonstrate that models created to reproduce three-phase traffic theory create similar spatiotemporal traffic states and associated phase diagrams, no matter whether…
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.
