QueueGuard — evaluation

Every variant sees the same arrivals and the same drivers for a given seed (common random numbers), so differences come from the warning strategy only. Driver behaviour parameters are stated assumptions (see docs/ASSUMPTIONS.md) and are varied below. Results are relative comparisons under those assumptions — not a prediction of real crash reductions, which needs a field pilot.

← Live demo Showing pre-computed results.
Loading…

1 · Main comparison and ablations

Severe end-of-queue conflicts per hour

Arrival speed at the queue (85th pct, km/h)

Queue time with no timely warning

Throughput past the work zone (veh/h)

2 · Sensitivity to the behaviour assumptions

If QueueGuard only worked under optimistic assumptions it would not be worth piloting. Each chart varies one assumption and keeps the rest at the defaults.

Chance a driver notices a warning

Distance at which unwarned drivers recognise stopped traffic

Peak demand (longer queues)

Warning placed too late (real tail within 150 m of the warning point 90 s later)