Adverse weather conditions significantly degrade mobility and safety at rural signalized intersections, where high approach speeds and limited driver expectancy amplify operational and crash risks. While autonomous vehicles (AVs) have the potential to improve traffic performance, it takes a significant duration to penetrate. During this period, mixed traffic with human drivers and AVs will dominate. In this mixed traffic, the impacts of AVs at low penetration levels on adverse weather remain insufficiently understood, particularly in rural contexts. This study presents a simulation-based assessment of the effects of low AV penetration on mobility and safety at a rural signalized intersection under varying weather conditions. A calibrated microsimulation model was developed using PTV VISSIM to represent clear, rain, and snow scenarios with autonomous vehicles introduced at low penetration rates within conventional traffic. Mobility performance was evaluated using delay, travel time, and average speed, while safety impacts were assessed through surrogate safety measures extracted using the Surrogate Safety Assessment Model (SSAM), including time-to-collision and post-encroachment time. Results indicate that low levels of AV penetration of 10% can improve overall mobility performance compared with conventional traffic, particularly under adverse weather conditions. Safety outcomes show a reduction in conflict frequency and severity under low AV penetration, with more pronounced benefits observed during degraded weather scenarios. Further AV penetration from 10% to 25% may not significantly improve in a rural environment. The findings suggest that early-stage AV deployment may offer measurable mobility and safety benefits at rural signalized intersections, even before widespread adoption. This study provides practical insights for transportation agencies and policymakers regarding the potential role of low-penetration AV integration in enhancing rural traffic operations and safety under adverse weather conditions.
Ahmed et al. (Thu,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: