Slashdot Mirror
Rude Drivers Reduce Traffic Jams
BuzzSkyline writes "Traffic jams are minimized if a significant fraction of drivers break the rules by doing things like passing on the wrong side or changing lanes too close to an intersection. The insight comes from a cellular automata study published this month in the journal Physical Review E. In effect, people who disregard the rules help to break up the groups that form as rule-followers clump together. The risk of jamming is lower if all people obey the rules than if they all disobey them, according to the analysis, but jamming risk is lowest when about 40 percent of people drive like jerks."
especially on the Belt Parkway where people seem to slow down to 30mph to go over a bridge
Of course rude drivers ease congestion. When they kill someone because of their stupidity, not only will that person not drive again, but they'll probably lose their license, so they won't either!
The problem of cars "clumping" is due to the "rule abiding" drivers following each other too closely. This is in fact not rule abiding.
A reasonable space must be left between each car to provide enough extra slack to handle unexpected events like braking and slowing. When people follow too closely, this slack is all but eliminated thus causing each unexpected event's effect to become magnified. A quick tap of the brakes causes a chain reaction resulting in a traffic jam. Leaving enough space to handle an unexpected event provides each driver extra time to react.
In addition, since the additional slack allows for longer reaction times, a faster average speed can be achieved. Bob Dobbs would be so proud.
Funny. When I have driven there, I thought that ppl were actually pretty nice, though fast.
In fact, I normally speed at about 9 over, but was being passed all over in Atlanta.
Another nice place was Seattle, but they tend to be slow.
Denver Colorado has some horribly rude drivers (esp. Highlands Ranch), but these are the types that cause jams. They like to drive in left lane AND go slow. I do a lot of passing on the right because ppl here are so bad. Likewise, they like to jam up. I do my utmost to get pass idiots like that and be in the open where I do not have to worry about bad drivers. Drivers here will actually try to prevent you from passing them and will flip you off if you do. We have far too many Texans and Easterners.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
"Breaking the rules" is not rude behavior on the road, as far as I'm concerned. Most of the problems on our highways are caused by people driving 'below' the rules. Some examples are failing to accelerate to highway speed on the onramp, driving in the 'passing' lane when you aren't passing anyone, and my personal least favorite, not being ready to go when the light turns green at a crowded rush hour intersection. If no-one made these key mistakes our highways would probably be able to accomodate 20% more traffic without any physical upgrades in capacity. yet somehow, I'm the bad guy for flashing my lights at some jerk driving 55 right next to someone else going 55 when there are 15 cars stacked up behind him!
Article also says to always obey the 3 second rule. This doesn't make sense. In heavy traffic most folks are 1/2 to one second apart. If you spread them 3 seconds apart, throughput goes down by a factor of between three and six. Too bad, the original research is impressive and spot on.
Vindication at last! I can now provide proof to my wife that my driving style has a purpose, and that purpose is for the greater good of mankind.
Take it to the limit, everybody to the limit, come on, everybody fhqwhgads.
IMO, a lot of problems could be avoided if people respected all the rules of the road, and not just the official ones. For example, I respect anyone's right to drive at whatever speed they feel comfortable with. If that's at, above or below the speed limit I don't care. However, no matter how fast you're going, if there's someone behind you who wishes to go faster, move over to the right. It's not your job to set speed limits, the cops do that, and they exercise discretion too depending on the traffic and time of the day.
What gets me really frustrated is people in the left lane, going at or slightly below the speed limit, with a LONG line behind them. It's situations like these that cause problems, as people who wish to go faster try to get around the slowpokes.
In my opinion, if people simply moved over for a faster car, kept the left lane open for passing/faster traffic, then the vast majority of weaving cars and "jerks" on the highways would disappear.
It's a big peeve of mine. I drive faster than the speed limit, I'll admit it. If I'm in the wrong, the cops will pull me over. However, get out of the left lane if you're going slow and there's 10 cars tailgating behind you!
-"Those who fought today will die tommorow."-
That depends on the loudness of your horn. If it displaces enough air to actually move the cars forward, you might be a helpful jerk.
I live in Boston, so I have empirical evidence that if 40% people drive like assholes, you still get plenty of traffic jams. Sorry, your model must be broken.
My Photography - http://ian-x.com
The Deathlings (comic) - http://thedeathlings.com
Well, in Germany it would be against the law to change early. It has been shown that driving till the end, and then merging as "one from the left lane, one from the right lane" is the most efficient way to handle ending lanes. Therefore the law demands that. It's called "Reissverschlussverfahren" ("zipper procedure").
The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
I think they did.
Self proclaimed typo king, and inventor of the bear destroying coffee table (patent not pending).
No, the interesting thing is that the people breaking the rules make the entire situation better for everyone else, too; not just for themselves.
On a related note, my other biggest pet peeve is the slow people who speed up when they see you trying to pass them so that you can't, and then slow down again.
-"Those who fought today will die tommorow."-
As somebody has already mentioned in the comment on PhysicsCentral, a realistic model should take into account the dependence between the probability of causing an accident resulting in a traffic jam and the driving style. I could read only the abstract. If the parameter q is the only parameter used, it is not entirely surprising that they got the results they got. In such a model, the rule-obeying drivers driving in the same direction stick together. Rule non-obedience makes the fluid more compressible. Shock waves in compressible fluids appears at higher velocities. It is surely nice their model agrees with the intuition. I would not call such a simplified model realistic, though.
If someone is passing on the wrong side, then someone else already being rude and breaking the rules by refusing to yield the passing lane.
The other day, a person was changing their tire on the shoulder of the road facing the opposite direction (was a 4-lane road, 2 lanes in each direction, separated by a 20 foot or so median) and traffic on my side of the road came to a halt. Once I made it to the front of the line of traffic, in the lane (going the opposite direction) nearest the tire-changer, a car in the lane next to me and slightly ahead of me was gawking at the scene so hard they started drifting HARD into my lane. They were completely mesmerized by someone changing a frigging tire. To the point that they weren't even conscious that they were still driving a car.
I swear I don't get it. I had to blare my horn at them to get them to get back over into their lane, and they had the temerity to flip me off! Luckily for me, I drive a large truck and was able to pull in front of them at the next light where I stopped, put on my hazards, drug them from their car and threw them into traffic. No, of course I didn't. However, it's interesting how rage-filled we people get in traffic. I am trying to get it under control, but cannot abide selfish, stupid unaware drivers. I hate them with a burning passion.
Sent from your iPad.
While they make the situation better for everybody, the people breaking the rules benefit the most. This is sort of like the "tragedy of the commons," with a twist. In the tragedy of the commons, the people who don't break the rules don't derive any benefit. In this situation, they're at least a little bit better off than if nobody broke the rules. Everybody has an incentive to try to be in that 40%, though. (Some people, like me, follow the rules dogmatically and altruistically.) I guess what's called for is some sort of automagic lottery system by which 40% of drivers in high-traffic situations are notified in real-time that they are being encouraged to drive more aggressively. AI researchers, get on that.
Virtue finds and chooses the mean.
Aristotle, Ethica Nichomachea
I know I slow down when people tailgate me very badly (within a meter), and speed up again when they change lanes. It's a guilty pleasure.
Honestly, it's the only safe thing to me do. If I have someone driving that close behind me I'll need more time to brake if something happens up ahead, to prevent the person behind me ramming into me.
Give me space, and we'll go a nice fast speed. I'll be happy to let you pass me and will move to the right. Ride my ass and expect to go under the limit.
Nothing frustrates me more than incompetence on the road. I deal with it swiftly, and with great justice!
Being Slashdot, the answer would be one that doesn't run on Linux :)
And they don't rubber-neck. They don't break down. They don't get pulled over for speeding tickets,
You've pegged Atlanta. Here, people tend to be somewhat nice drivers. (As opposed to, for example, New York City, where they are horrible mean.) But very, very fast on the highways.
And, for some totally inexplicably reason, the Downtown Connector has a frickin speed limit of 55, so people are constantly going about 20 over, or about 10 over what it should be. (The greatest stunt ever.)
For those of you who don't know what the Connector is, that's where I-75 and I-85, the main north-south roads, merge into one giant superroad. 16 lanes of traffic in some places, 300,000+ cars a day.
All going 80 miles an hour. Down a road that doesn't have a medium, or a shoulder half the time. (The road essentially goes underneath the city streets, straight through both Downtown and Midtown, with walls down the side and buildings on top of them looming over the road.)
OTOH, people will, in fact, let you into traffic on the surface streets, and not attempt to wedge their car up your ass or cut you off.
If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
the safe thing to do is you should have already switched lanes (if you're in the left that is) by the time they got to you if you see them coming up.
As someone living in CA, I agree that it's a nuisance (San Diego seems to be much better about this than LA), however, the left lane is NOT a passing lane in CA as it is in other states. All lanes of traffic are free for general travel, and it is expected that faster traffic moves left. In some states it is illegal to stay in the left lane, but not CA.
I'm out of my mind right now, but feel free to leave a message.....
Cute. But actually the paper is more about the probability of forming jams, not about getting rid of jams once they've already formed.
The conclusion is more like: Though traffic rules are designed to lead to orderly flows, the lowest jamming rate (under certain conditions) actually occurs when some fraction of participants ignore the rules.
(As a side note, it's a bit of a pet-peeve of mine when people make fun of studies by saying "That conclusion is so obvious! What a waste of time!" Common sense, hunches, and gut feelings are often wrong, which is why we do rigorous research to get at the right answers. And even if the general conclusion is obvious (in hindsight, mind you), rigorous research means that we can say something about error bars and make specific statements about applicability and predictability of models.)
The convenient thing about jerks is that, nearly by definition, they aren't worried about justification.
Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
Hopefully I won't get trolled for this, but it's that kind of mentality that causes accidents. Not the part about slowing down in front of a tailgater necessarily, but intentionally speeding up as soon as they go to pass you in the other lane.
As an FYI not all states require the passing lane to be "yeilded" so long as you are going the speed limit. This is the case I believe in MD as well as NC, among others. If the speed limit is 65 and and both lanes have people next to each other going 65, get over it, no law is being broken.
And if the speed limit is 65, and I'm in the left lane going 75, and you come up on my ass flashing lights trying to get me to move over, you will get ignored. I don't give a shit if you want to go 85 in a 65 like 30% of the other drivers, the limit is 65 and I'm already going 75. I'm not going to move into the right lane and get stuck behind someone going 55, unable to change lanes because everyone on my left is going 25-30mph faster than me.
the safe thing to do is you should have already switched lanes (if you're in the left that is) by the time they got to you if you see them coming up.
This isn't always possible. Often, there are people in the right hand lane going 70-75 mph and passing the speed limiters in the left lane who are traveling 65 mph. Just because you want to go 85 mph doesn't mean the slower motorists should automatically bow to your speedy abilities. This would, in my opinion, mean that *you* are driving like an asshole.
This is *most* evident when two tractor trailers are passing each other on a major two or three lane highway. But basic congestion causes it too... and whenever you drive like an asshole when there is already congestion... you are only going to make it worse.
Corollary: I've always thought cops should actively seek to give tickets to motorists who get passed on the left by drivers who are traveling at a legal speed limit. That behavior is just a dangerous as the asshole who weaves in and out of traffic. So, slow drivers in right-hand and middle lanes are assholes, too.
Support the 30 Hour Work Week!!!
D10 dice. Roll for enhanced "jerk". Less than 4 succeeds.
Remember, You are unique...just like everyone else.
Nice! I am finally part of the solution.
"Seven years of college down the drain. Might as well join the f-ing Peace Corps." - John 'Bluto' Blutarsky
I'm with you there, I used to like to speed. Now I like to cruise in the slow lane, and I have the opposite peeve: Asshats who refuse to use the two empty lanes on my left to pass, and ride my frickin bumper. I'll give em a minute, then the foot comes off the gas. Had one guy wait until we got down to 35 before he passed me. So sorry, is changing lanes really that hard?
Never let a lack of data get in the way of a good rant.
If the speed limit is 65 and and both lanes have people next to each other going 65, get over it, no law is being broken.
That just means that your legislators are utter failures. There does not exist an excuse for failing to prevent people from blocking the freeways. This is the primary cause of congestion and accidents.
I'm not going to move into the right lane and get stuck behind someone going 55, unable to change lanes because everyone on my left is going 25-30mph faster than me.
So you'll stick *everybody else in the entire passing lane*r behind your dumb, slow moving ass and you thing that's somehow ok while it's a great tragedy to expect you to keep up with the flow of traffic WTF you utterly sleazy self-centered piece of garbage wrapped in skin?!?!?! I'm truly amazed at how fucking vile some people go out of their way to choose to be.
*You* are the problem in this situation. *You* are the jerk, and *you* are the bad guy.
You refuse to keep up with the traffic in the passing lane yet you also refuse to remain in the lane appropriate to your speed and driving abilities.
The people going 85 in the *passing lane* are going with the flow of traffic and are driving appropriately for the conditions. You are not doing either of those things. You are intentionally and with malice aforethought blocking the passing lane in order to prevent other people from using the roads they pay for in a the perfectly safe manner they choose. You are increasing everybody's risk, and you're doing it solely so that you can be a jerk to the people around you. If you can not keep up with the normal pace of traffic in the fast lane, then the only decent, rational, or appropriate thing for you to do is stay out of the way of the people who are traveling at the proper speed. There is nothing about your actions that justify the problems you are willfully choosing to inflict on the poeple around you solely due to the fact that you can't be bothered to go the appropriate speed. The appropriate speed is never determined by the laws which you've already admitted your legislators are failures at determining, it's determined by the speed traffic is traveling. You are in the wrong and there is nothing that could possibly justify your active asshattery. Please stop it and start acting as if you were a decent human being instead of the malicious asshole you declared yourself to be.
You're not even helping yourself and you're fucking over tons of people around you. I mean think that through, Sparky, and consider what a vile scumbag your chosen course of action *proves* you to be absolutely and beyond any possibility of a doubt.
My take on that, is that as long as you are actually passing somebody, you have every right to remain in the passing lane, even if some %#^@*! wants to go 10 mph faster than you. However, once the lane to your right is clear for a reasonable distance, you must yield the passing lane, even if you think the guy behind you is going unreasonably fast. This is the law here in MA and I believe most states enforce "keep right except to pass". Driving the speed limit does not entitle you to the left lane, even though it's an apparent contradiction that the speeder behind you has the right to pass you.
RETURN without GOSUB in line 1050
As someone living in CA, I agree that it's a nuisance (San Diego seems to be much better about this than LA), however, the left lane is NOT a passing lane in CA as it is in other states. All lanes of traffic are free for general travel, and it is expected that faster traffic moves left. In some states it is illegal to stay in the left lane, but not CA.
California Vehicle Code: 21654. (a) Notwithstanding the prima facie speed limits, any vehicle proceeding upon a highway at a speed less than the normal speed of traffic moving in the same direction at such time shall be driven in the right-hand lane for traffic or as close as practicable to the right-hand edge or curb, except when overtaking and passing another vehicle proceeding in the same direction or when preparing for a left turn at an intersection or into a private road or driveway.
1. "hypermilers" who don't understand lights are timed for the speed limit, and if you don't get up to speed in a reasonable amount of time, you're just going to waste all that gas at red lights.
2. During rush hour, the problem on "surface" streets is that lights can't be long enough to allow everyone to go through during the green light, so those people just sitting there when the light turns green are racking up the number of cars that are going to get stuck for an extra cycle... but the problem, as I see it, is people have largely stopped honking, so they'll just sit behind such an oblivious person and just wait. If people honked, we could get things moving again. It doesn't have to be a nasty lean on the horn, just a toot-toot.
And lately, the past year or so, I wouldn't necessarily call them "hypermilers" but so many people seem unwilling to even get up to the speed limit, let alone exceed it by a few miles per hour, as if you're going to get a ticket for 48 in a 45... I know the police aren't going to give me a ticket for 5 miles over, and I often get passed by cops when doing so.
He's a thing I do: When the light in front of me turns red, I get my foot off the gas, and I let the car decelerate towards the red light.
When I'm in the zone, I pretty much don't stop at red lights because they have the time to turn back to green before I get to them.
Now, here's the problem with that: The masses of idiots who are in a fucking hurry to go park on the red. They cut me off, and then I have to stop behind them while I wait for them to start up again when the light turns green. Some of them are salvageable, as after seeing me do my thing for a few lights they understand the principle and start laying off the gas when they see the next red, some are not, and insist on cutting me off and, I dunno... win the street race going on in their demented little heads. First one wasting gas and brake lining wins! Woo!
Anyway, leadfoot, remember that red lights mean "stop accelerating", not "this is the finish line to the race, quick, get here before anybody else" :)
You can't take the sky from me...
Calm down, chief. If he's going 75 in the passing lane like he said, and the other lane is going 55 he is exactly where he should be. If he's passing, he belongs in the passing lane. Your right to pass him is not more important than his right to pass others. If you think it is, that makes you the "utterly sleazy self-centered piece of garbage wrapped in skin."
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
Here in the Phoenix, Arizona metropolitan area, we have dozens of fixed and mobile speed cameras on our state highways. (There is currently a drive to ban them - go to camerafraud.com to learn more about their drive - but that's another story). A big part of the pro-camera argument coming from the vendors (and the Highway Patrol - called DPS in Arizona) is that the cameras significantly improve traffic flow and make the roads "smoother and more efficient" for drivers, and this study flies in the face of this oft-preached philosophy.
I'm one of those "jerk drivers" this study was talking about, and my anecdotal experience has been that since the cameras were installed and turned on last November, the drivers now will not move over and let other drivers by (this behavior suddenly appeared the week of the installation, so there's strong correlation between the two events.) Whether it is because of speed camera fear, pride, revenge-driven anger at speeders, or gadget-induced ignorance of the drivers around them (cell phones, texting, etc.), they are now clogging ALL lanes at cruise control like speeds. (In many cases I have seen these drivers taking advantage of their "smooth" time by choose to text or call other people or do some other menial (and dangerous) task while being oblivious of the rolling traffic jam that is forming behind them.)
When I can finally get past these drivers and go around them at 15+ over the ridiculously low 55 or 65 MPH speed limits they are rolling along at (keep in mind that these are speed limits on newer, modern, wide, and smooth 10+ lane highways), it breaks these clogs up for various reasons. Sometimes the slow drivers realize that they are a problem and move over. At other times, other drivers are encouraged to speed up and go around the slower drivers. Either way, the traffic cesspool that forms due to one or two "law abiding citizens" that don't move out of the way is broken up - by me, a "jerk" driver.
So, if this study is correct, and speed cameras continue to go up everywhere, and license plates are tracked in order to enforce speeds EVERYWHERE, traffic is going to suffer greatly in Arizona, unless us "jerks" keep it moving more efficiently.
Welcome to Seattle!
"We returned the General to El Salvador, or maybe Guatemala, it's difficult to tell from 10,000 feet"
I take issue whatever study showed that waiting until the last minute is more efficient. You've got 1 lane of traffic, and for any given speed that lane travels at, you can only get a certain flow rate of cars through that bottleneck, no matter if it's 1 lane feeding it, 2 lanes, or 100 lanes. Well, if you wait until the last minute to merge, you end up with cars tighter together, which means the tolerance for merging is a lot smaller. This would be perfectly fine if everything were computer controlled, but since we've got human with emotions involved, you end up with people having to slow down to merge more carefully. But see, by slowing down, you've just decreased the speed of the lane, so fewer cars are going to make it through in a given time. On the other hand, if you merge early, vehicles will not yet have moved into a tighter formation, so you can more comfortably merge into a single lane without having to slow down as much. You can maintain a higher overall speed, and thus get a higher flow rate through the bottleneck. However, even if you can merge together at the last minute without slowing down, at best you get the same flow rate as if everyone had merged early, so in what way is merging late better?
Of course, we are talking theoretically here. As soon as the one idiot gets greedy and waits until the end, you lose that benefit as everyone has to slow down anyway. However, that's where proper enforcement can come into play. Start ticketing people and they'll learn. Then again, you start ticketing people and that just compounds the problem as people start slowing down..."oh my god, it's a police officer....and he's writing a ticket....slow...down...I've...never...seen...that...before". I guess the only way to make it work right is to go vigilante and start blocking the lane, but then that opens up a whole different can of worms. I guess you can't win.
Also, on this topic, I find it interesting to see how people in different areas behave. Here in Michigan, you will almost always see people waiting until the last minute to merge. A few years ago we went down the the Smokies/Blue Ridge Parkway. On the way back, we were in Virginia (or maybe West Virginia). There was construction at a tunnel, and we were merged into one lane. There was nobody waiting until the last minute to merge. I looked back in the mirror, and for as far as I could see (at least a half mile), there was just a single line of cars and an empty lane.