Identification of recurrent bottlenecks is an effective way to hone an appropriate investment in current facilities to relieve congestion. Furthermore, it would enable the ranking or prioritisation of bottlenecks since bottleneck removal and its associated impact alleviation are hampered by limited sources. It is imperative that transportation jurisdiction understand and identify the basis for ranking bottlenecks by exploring: how often they are active; how long it takes the congestion to disappear; and how many miles of road are affected. Previous bottleneck identification schemes have focused on identifying congestion with little attention to distinguishing the recurrent level at the same ‘bottleneck’ location. In contrast to traditional schemes, a data-driven approach for identifying recurrent bottlenecks is introduced, using probe vehicle speed reports. The historical spatiotemporal characteristics of bottlenecks are investigated through a comprehensive analysis of 2253 miles of all state-wide interstates in North Carolina. Using the characteristics determined the recurrent bottleneck locations with a historical time span of bottleneck activation are revealed and tested. The findings of the proposed identification schemes generate critical information in order to quantify and diagnose a bottleneck and its associated impact area.

References

1. 1)
  - 9. Chen, C., Skabardonis, A., Varaiya, P.: ‘Systematic identification of freeway bottlenecks’, Transp. Res. Rec., J. Transp. Res. Board, 2004, 1867, pp. 46–52.
2. 2)
  - 19. Dowling, R., Skabardonis, A., Carroll, M., et al: ‘Methodology for measuring recurrent and nonrecurrent traffic congestion’, Transp. Res. Rec., J. Transp. Res. Board, 2004, 1867, pp. 60–68.
3. 3)
  - 2. Bertini, R.L., Leal, M.T.: ‘Empirical study of traffic features at a freeway lane drop’, J. Transp. Eng., 2005, 131, (6), pp. 397–407.
4. 4)
  - 15. Hale, D.K., Hajbabaie, A., Ma, J., et al: ‘Congestion and bottlenecks: identification software tool’ (2015).
5. 5)
  - 16. Kerner, B.S.: ‘Breakdown in traffic networks: fundamentals of transportation science’ (Springer, 2017).
6. 6)
  - 17. Hallenbeck, M.E., Ishimaru, J., Nee, J.: Measurement of recurring versus non-recurring congestion: technical report’ (Washington State Transportation Center (TRAC), 2003).
7. 7)
  - 24. TRB: ‘Highway capacity manual’ (Transportation Research Board, 2010).
8. 8)
  - 23. Moses, R., Mtoi, , E.: ‘Evaluation of free flow speeds on interrupted flow facilities’ (FAMU-FSU College of Engineering, 2013).
9. 9)
  - 6. Brilon, W., Geistefeldt, J., Regler, M.: ‘Reliability of freeway traffic flow: a stochastic concept of capacity’. 16th Int. Symp. on Transportation and Traffic Theory, Elsevier, 2005.
10. 10)
  - 20. Chung, Y.: ‘Identifying primary and secondary crashes from spatiotemporal crash impact analysis’, Transp. Res. Rec., J. Transp. Res. Board, 2013, 2386, pp. 62–71.
11. 11)
  - 7. Hall, F.L., Agyemang-Duah, K.: ‘Freeway capacity drop and the definition of capacity’, Transp. Res. Rec., J. Transp. Res. Board, 1991.
12. 12)
  - 11. Yildirimoglu, M., Geroliminis, N.: ‘Travel time estimation and prediction in freeway systems’. 12th Swiss Transport Research Conf., 2012.
13. 13)
  - 14. www.ritis.org, accessed date accessed 2016 accessed.
14. 14)
  - 10. Wieczorek, J., Fernández-Moctezuma, R.J., Bertini, R.L.: ‘Techniques for validating an automatic bottleneck detection tool using archived freeway sensor data’, Transp. Res. Rec., J. Transp. Res. Board, 2010, 2160, pp. 87–95.
15. 15)
  - 1. Cooner, S.A., Ranft, S.E., Zimmerman, C.: ‘An agency guide on overcoming unique challenges to localized congestion reduction projects’ (US Department of Transportation, 2011).
16. 16)
  - 13. ‘Florida, Bottlenecks on Florida SIS’, 2011.
17. 17)
  - 4. Lorenz, M., Elefteriadou, L.: ‘Defining freeway capacity as function of breakdown probability’, Transp. Res. Rec., J. Transp. Res. Board, 2001, 1776, pp. 43–51.
18. 18)
  - 3. Jia, A., Williams, B.M., Rouphail, N.M.: ‘Identification and calibration of site-specific stochastic freeway breakdown and queue discharge’, Transp. Res. Rec., J. Transp. Res. Board, 2010.
19. 19)
  - 12. Liu, K., Fei, X.: ‘A fuzzy-logic-based system for freeway bottleneck severity diagnosis in a sensor network’, Transp. Res. C, Emerg. Technol., 2010, 18, pp. 554–567.
20. 20)
  - 18. Skabardonis, A., Varaiya, P.P., , Petty, K.: ‘Measuring recurrent and nonrecurrent traffic congestion’, Transp. Res. Rec., J. Transp. Res. Board, 2003, 1856, pp. 118–124.
21. 21)
  - 22. Chung, Y.: ‘Quantification of nonrecurrent congestion delay caused by freeway accidents and analysis of causal factors’, Transp. Res. Rec., J. Transp. Res. Board, 2011, 2229, pp. 8–18.
22. 22)
  - 8. Zhang, L., Levison, D., ‘Some properties of flows at freeway bottlenecks’, Transp. Res. Rec., J. Transp. Res. Board, 2004.
23. 23)
  - 21. Medina, C.: ‘Assessment of non-recurrent congestion on Dutch motorways’, MSc, Delft University of Technology, 2010.
24. 24)
  - 5. Elefteriadou, L., Roess, R. P., McShane, W. R.: ‘Probabilistic nature of breakdown at freeway merge junctions’, Transp. Res. Rec., J. Transp. Res. Board, 1995.

Data-driven approach for identifying spatiotemporally recurrent bottlenecks

References

Related content