CV Application 04 / 06ArterialEffective

Red Light Violation Warning

Three deceleration zones, one SPaT message, zero violations.

Red Light Violation Warning uses real-time SPaT and MAP messages broadcast from the intersection RSU to let connected vehicles predict whether they can safely clear the intersection — and if not, brake in a controlled, zoned cascade. A safety-critical application where communications quality is paramount.

Deployment
Direct V2X via RSU
V2X Messages
SPaT · MAP · BSM
Latency Profile
Safety-critical
0
Test Networks
0
CV Penetration Rates
0
Latency Levels
0
Packet Loss Rates
01 · System Design

How It Works

The RSU at each signalized intersection pulls SPaT data directly from the traffic signal controller and broadcasts SPaT + MAP messages. Each connected vehicle correlates its position, speed, and the signal state to decide if it's a potential red-light runner, then applies a three-zone deceleration profile.

01

RSU broadcasts SPaT + MAP

MAP messages at 1 Hz (intersection geometry). SPaT messages at 10 Hz (current phase, time to next phase). 1,640 ft range covers the intersection comfortably.

02

CV runs violation prediction

Each CV checks: am I too close to the stop bar? Am I traveling too fast? Is there no leader ahead? If yes — and the signal won't permit clearance — it's flagged as a potential runner.

03

Compute distance thresholds

L_th1 is fixed at 32.8 ft. L_th2 = 3× the vehicle's braking distance at current speed (normal deceleration). L_th3 = 5× the same braking distance. These bound three deceleration zones.

04

Apply zoned braking

Zone 3 (between L_th2 and L_th3): decelerate at d_normal. Zone 2 (between L_th1 and L_th2): decelerate at 2× d_normal. Zone 1 (inside L_th1): emergency brake at 4× d_normal. The algorithm doesn't fire beyond L_th3.

Implementation Detail

Identifying a potential runner

  • Vehicle is close to the intersection (within braking-distance multiples).
  • Vehicle is traveling fast enough to overshoot if signal turns red.
  • No leader vehicle ahead to enforce a stop naturally.
  • If light is red: cannot stop before the stop bar at max deceleration before green.
  • If light is green or yellow: cannot pass the stop bar at current speed before red.
02 · Experimental Setup

Test Networks & Scenarios

Test Networks

#1

2-lane · 40 mph · 120 s cycle

Longer-cycle signalized intersection with through, left, and right movements. RSU at the intersection, stop-bar and advance detectors at each approach for actuated control.

#2

2-lane · 40 mph · 90 s cycle

Same speed, shorter cycle — tests algorithm performance under more frequent phase transitions where SPaT timing uncertainty matters more.

#3

2-lane · 35 mph · 90 s cycle

Lower-speed arterial, short cycle. Smaller braking distance multiples produce tighter deceleration zones.

Key Simulation Parameters

Simulation window8:00 – 9:00 AM (5 min warm-up)
Per-approach demand100 thru + 15 LT + 10 RT vph
Baseline assumption100% of through traffic are potential runners
RSU range1640 ft (500 m)
SPaT broadcast rate10 Hz
MAP broadcast rate1 Hz
CV BSM rate10 Hz
Communications latency sweep0 · 0.1 · 0.2 · 0.5 s
Packet loss sweep0% · 5% · 10% · 15%
CV penetration sweep0% → 100% in 10% steps
Replications / scenario10
L_th1 / L_th2 / L_th3 ratios32.8 ft · 3× · 5×
Zone deceleration multipliers1× / 2× / 4× d_normal
03 · Results

Simulation Findings

Under ideal communications the algorithm prevents red-light running across all speeds and cycle lengths. Latency degrades it; packet loss less so; and CV penetration acts as a stabilizer.

01

Algorithm works under ideal conditions

At zero latency and zero packet loss, the three-zone braking strategy prevents red-light violations across all three test networks. The control logic itself is sound.

02

Both degradations hurt performance

As latency or packet loss rises, the algorithm's effectiveness drops — most sharply when CV penetration is low. Few CVs + degraded comms = many missed brakes.

03

Latency is more critical than packet loss

Even at zero latency, the algorithm performs reasonably well across packet-loss rates. Add latency and the failures compound much faster. Communications jitter is the bigger enemy than message drops.

04

Higher CV penetration stabilizes the system

At 90% and 100% penetration, the negative effects of latency and packet loss become much smaller. More CVs in the network smooths out individual missed messages.

05

Range isn't a variable

At 1,640 ft the RSU covers the entire intersection comfortably, so range was not swept. For larger or non-standard intersections this would need re-evaluation.

06

Aimsun's red-light-runner modeling

Followed Aimsun Technical Support guidance: define a compliant-vehicle signal group, then introduce non-compliant 'through' vehicles that ignore traffic signals. 100% of through vehicles are modeled as potential runners — an extreme scenario.

04 · Discussion

What This Means

Red Light Violation Warning is a clear win for V2X — the algorithm works, but only if the agency invests in the communications layer that carries it.

The simulation makes the case that real-time SPaT and MAP information can prevent red-light running through pre-emptive, zoned deceleration. The control logic is robust enough that latency and packet-loss sensitivity reveal themselves only in degraded-communications regimes — meaning the algorithm is not the weak link.

The latency-versus-packet-loss asymmetry is operationally significant. Network jitter is much harder to engineer out than message reliability, and it's the dominant degradation factor. Agencies sizing V2X infrastructure should prioritize low-latency message paths over high-redundancy packet delivery.

The stabilizing effect of high CV penetration is the strongest argument for an aggressive deployment runway. Caltrans's value proposition isn't 'install RSUs and hope' — it's 'partner with the private sector to drive CV adoption, because the technology pays off in proportion to how many vehicles can use it.'

05 · Recommendations

Deployment Guidance

01

Specify low-latency communications hardware and network design for any Red Light Violation Warning deployment. Latency degrades performance faster than packet loss does.

02

Pair RSU installation with a parallel push for CV adoption — high penetration stabilizes the algorithm against communications imperfection.

03

Use the three-zone deceleration profile as the algorithmic baseline: L_th1 = 32.8 ft, L_th2 = 3× braking distance, L_th3 = 5× braking distance with 4× / 2× / 1× normal deceleration in zones 1 / 2 / 3.

04

Broadcast SPaT at 10 Hz and MAP at 1 Hz at minimum. SPaT freshness directly determines algorithm precision.

05

Coordinate with private-sector OEMs and connected-vehicle vendors. Public deployment alone won't reach the penetration rates that make the system robust.

Overall Verdict
Effective
Recommended for deployment