Cooperative V2V Clustering Algorithm for Improving
Road Traffic Safety Information
Marius Minea
Abstract – The paper presents solutions for improving traffic
safety by providing on-board information regarding traffic
behaviour of al local cluster of neighbouring vehicles. The
proposed solution also may contribute to reducing accidents on
major motorways by issuing early warning regarding speed. The
solution is based on a local clustering algorithm to ensure
information provision between neighbouring groups of vehicles.
Advantages and weaknesses of the solution are also analysed.
Keywords – Vehicle clustering algorithm, V2X
communications (Infrastructure to Vehicle Communications -
I2V, also referred to as V2I, vehicle to vehicle communications
V2V), CALM (Communications Access for Land Mobiles).
I. INTRODUCTION
Actual European policies for road transportation focus on
traffic safety. Among the objectives proposed in [1],
Objective #7 states that a significant increase of the
infrastructure use for transport is necessary over ”a
deployment of equivalent land ... transport management
systems (ITS - Intelligent Transport Systems), ..., and
deployment of the European global navigation satellite system
(Galileo)”. Objective #9 also states that 2050 should be the
target year for reducing road traffic fatalities close to zero”.
Modern ITS vehicle to infrastructure communications (V2I)
recommend CALM for improving connectivity and inter-
operability of different infrastructure equipment in a
cooperative safety system for road traffic. ISO 13183:2012
specifies the architectural communications framework of ITS
for the family of CALM related International Standards. The
graphical representations of the architecture partly follow the
ISO open systems interconnection (OSI) principles. In [2], the
authors investigate the necessity of deploying “soft safety”
mobility and convenience applications using a diverse variety
of wireless communications technologies along with
proprietary systems and applications. Considering this, the
crash-avoidance safety applications require that all
participating vehicles and roadside units are able to sense and
understand each other and they are also able to communicate
via a harmonised interface. Short range communications such
as V2V (vehicle to vehicle) or V2I (vehicle to infrastructure)
are used when discussing about traffic safety, especially for
Cooperative Collision Avoidance (CCA) systems. However,
the communication link is only one of the processes that may
induce delay in traffic management information delivery.
Other processes might be: acquisition of dynamic parameters
from vehicles (position, speed, heading, headroom etc.),
Marius Minea is with Transports Faculty, University Politehnica
of Bucharest, 313, Splaiul Independentei, Bucharest, Romania,
E-mail: marius.minea@upb.ro
978-1-4673-7516-0/15/$31.00 ©2015 European Union 369
time for computing safety conditions, or delay introduced by
protocols for distribution of useful information to all involved
vehicles’ drivers. In this case, the communication link
becomes more crucial, as quality of service (QoS) and privacy
of information must be set at very high levels. In critical
situations there remains little room for messages delaying due
to packet loss retransmissions, jitter or other communication
issues. On the other hand, new achievements in
standardisation offers CALM (ISO TC204 WG16), which
ensures safer V2V and V2I communications (standards
IEEE802.11p and P1609, ETSI ERM TG-37 – 2G and 3G
standards, IETF – network mobility – NEMO etc.) that are to
be taken into consideration when needing more speed,
prioritisation or bandwidth in dense urban environmental
areas communications. In this paper a clustering algorithm for
cooperative collision avoidance systems is investigated and
case investigations are provided for determining the amount
of delaying introduced by communications protocols and
other information processing used for CCA systems. CALM
M5 is recommendable for critical safety applications such as
CCA, as it incorporates: global (European) 5 GHz spectrum,
directivity and electromagnetic compatible (EMC) control
along with GPRS/UMTS network interconnectivity.
II. PRESENT ADVANCES IN V2X
COMMUNICATIONS RELATED TO TRAFFIC
SAFETY
Different studies in scientific literature present a variety of
results concerning afore mentioned aspects. In [3], Chou et.
Al. measure the latency, throughput and packet loss in
WiMAX and WiFi settings for a traffic communication
system in an urban environment with disabled WEP
encryption and without external antenna. These studies show
that one might be able to get more throughput and a shorter
latency from WiFi at short distance (e.g. less than 100 m),
assuming there are too many interfering sources in the area
that also use the 2.4 GHz band. It is also shown that frame
duration can have a critical effect on the performance of
WiMAX. Bohm and Jonsson [4] demonstrate that for critical
safety transport systems, a communication link over the IEEE
802.11p standard is capable of supporting speed and data flow
information for an up to four lanes highway, depending on
actual vehicle density and average vehicles velocity.
According to the authors of [5], the main objectives of a
Traffic Control Centre (TCC) involved in computations for in-
vehicle signing may include (considering all vehicles are
linked informally to the TCC via wireless communication):
- Incident warning/critical traffic condition warning;
- Road works information (lane closures etc.);
 - In-vehicle variable speed limit information;
- Traffic congestion warning;
- Route navigation related information etc.
For the different extreme case studies, the limiting factors are
determined:
- High traffic density case (urban environment): limiting
factor – the performance of the communication
network at high traffic density;
- High cruising speed (inter-urban environment): the
handover delay at high speed
In [6] Biswas et. all demonstrate efficiency of a CCA system
employing prioritised V2V communications to improve early
warning effects on reducing traffic accidents occurrence.
Using dedicated messages and prioritised channels, vehicles
arriving on a highway to a recent crash site are instantly
prompted to reduce speed, avoiding chain collisions.
Examples of such applications include en-route driver
information propagation, collision warning and avoidance
systems, and adaptive cruise control systems. For critical
safety applications that require fast message broadcasting such
as CCA, in [7] the authors declare that ad-hoc algorithms are
not suggested and instead methodologies that provide formal
safety guarantees, such as those found in the control theory
and computer science literature are recommended.
III. CONTEXT AWARENESS ARCHITECTURE AND
ALGORITHM FOR DELIVERING SAFETY
INFORMATION
A recent evolution in automotive industry and V2X
communications is the one toward context awareness,
involving vehicles aware of their neighbourhood (presence,
location and safety in relationship with other vehicles).
Modern vehicles may be equipped with the following:
- GPS/DGPS or A-GPS receiver with improved accuracy
and in near-future, a Galileo SS receiver;
- e-CALL system for rapid event notification to relevant
authorities; possible front-end/back-end radars for
obstacle detection and collision avoidance and Event
Data Recorder – similar to airplanes’ black-boxes etc.
We can then assume such vehicles are ”smart”. The ”smart”
feature, however, must also extend to the infrastructure, which
may be seen both as a support for safety information
collection and delivery. Fig. 1 shows this context.
d1, rs1
Mh Msr
d2, rs2
d3, rs3
Mrv
Fig. 1. Clustering of vehicles
The dark red vehicle in Fig. 1 is the central (critical) node of
the cluster, beneficiary of safety information. The proposed
model supports clustering algorithm with one hop in
communication and it is more rapid for CCA systems to have
a single hop implementation. The one hop method simplifies
370
the overall communication, clustering strategy and reduces the
over exceeding of cluster dimensions. The neighbouring
vehicles then fit in one of the following situations:
- Vehicles located in communications range (assuming
the DSRC / WiFi is the communication technology,
these are included in some tens to hundreds of meters
in front and back of the main node):
𝑣𝑥 ∈ 𝑀𝑟𝑣 , 𝑀𝑟𝑣 = {𝑣𝑟 , 𝑟 = 1, … , 𝑛} (1)
where 𝑀𝑟𝑣 represents the cluster of all neighbouring received
vehicle identities and 𝑣𝑥 is the identity of central node vehicle.
- Received vehicles that share the same direction of
movement (yellow and blue vehicles in Fig. 1). The
information might be collected from a GPS device or
electronic compass onboard the vehicles in cluster 𝑀𝑟𝑣 :
𝑣𝑥 ∈ 𝑀𝐻, 𝑀𝐻 = {𝑣𝐻 , 𝐻 = 1, … , ℎ} (2)
𝑀𝐻 ⊂ 𝑀𝑟𝑣
where 𝑀𝐻 is the cluster of received vehicles that share the
same direction of movement with the node vehicle.
- Received vehicles located in safety interest area (blue
vehicles in Fig. 1). This cluster needs to be formed
only by those received vehicles that travel in front of
main node 𝑣𝑥 .
𝑣𝑥 (∈ 𝑀𝑓 , 𝑀𝑓 = {𝑣𝑓 , 𝑓 = 1, … 𝐹} (3)
𝑀𝑓 ⊂ 𝑀𝐻 ⊂ 𝑀𝑟𝑣
where F is the total number of received vehicles that travel in
front of the main node and 𝑀𝑓 the cluster of these vehicles.
The purpose is to select from the 𝑀𝐻 cluster only those
vehicles travelling in front of the central node vehicle, in order
to compute relative speed and safety distance between the
central node and these vehicles.
- Received vehicles with a certain threshold of
persistence in the cluster. This condition is set to
eliminate those vehicles travelling in the same
direction with significant higher or lower speeds than
the main node (vehicles on other lanes of the highway
– light blue vehicles in Fig. 1).
∑𝑘
𝑖𝑑=1 𝑛𝑖𝑑
𝑣𝑥 ∈ 𝑀𝑑𝑙 , 𝑀𝑑𝑙 = �𝑣𝑖 � > 𝜉� (4)
𝑁
In relationship (4) above, 𝑀𝑑𝑙 is the cluster of vehicles 𝑣𝑖 with
the property that the total number of per time unit received ID
messages ∑𝑘𝑖𝑑=1 𝑛𝑖𝑑 exceeds a certain threshold, 𝜉, that is,
these vehicles maintain a relative close position to the central
node vehicle (they do not pass in short time due to their
superior/inferior speed). The algorithm tries to evaluate each
received vehicle’s affiliation to a specific cluster and then
retrieves relevant dynamic information only from selected
vehicles. For each vehicle belonging to such interest cluster
𝑀𝑓 a set of information is collected:
- Relative speed: 𝑠𝑟𝑖 = |𝑠𝑥 − 𝑠𝑖 |, 𝑖 = 1, … , 𝐹 (5)
𝑑𝑠
- Relative acceleration / deceleration: 𝑎𝑟𝑖 = 𝑟𝑖 (6)
𝑑𝑡
- Cluster average speed:
∑𝐹 𝑠
𝐶𝑆𝑎𝑣𝑔 = 𝑖=1 𝑟𝑖 (7)
𝐹
- Cluster average relative acceleration:
∑𝐹
𝑗=1 𝑎𝑟𝑖
𝐶𝐴𝑎𝑣𝑔 = . (8)
𝐹
The relative speed and relative acceleration/deceleration
represent safety information used to build a weighted alarm
function and to deliver early warning to the driver of the
central node vehicle in case of an event or emergency braking time for the information to pass over the communication
produced by a vehicle situated in front. This information network is in this case:
might also be displayed by the on-board computer of the main 𝜏𝑉2𝑋 = 𝜉𝑏 (𝜃𝑏 + 𝜈) + 𝜉𝑑 (𝜃𝑎 + 𝜈) (11)
node vehicle. The weighted alarm function could be in the
where τV2X denotes the time shifting introduced by the ad-hoc
form presented in equation (9):
local clustering, θ𝑏 and θa are delays in the network on the
Ψ𝑤 = 𝜔1 ∙ 𝑁(𝑣𝑥 ∈ 𝑀𝑑𝑙 ) + 𝜔2 ∙ 𝑁(𝑠𝑟𝑖 > 𝜑𝐶𝑆𝑎𝑣𝑔 ) + 𝜔3 ∙
broadcast link (broadcast of information) and back-link
𝑁(𝑎𝑟𝑖 > 𝛾𝐶𝐴𝑎𝑣𝑔 ) (9) (acknowledge) paths, ξ𝑏 and ξd represent random delay
In equation (9), Ψ𝑤 is the weighted alarm function,, N number factors on the broadcast and respectively on the acknowledge
of vehicles that fit the condition in quotes, 𝜔1 … 𝜔3 represent transmission paths, depending on the cluster coverage and
weighting factors, 𝜑 and 𝛾 coefficients of importance in accessibility in difficult reception areas (such as tunnels).
relationship with the criteria chosen for alarming. However, Usually, ξ𝑏 and ξd induce considerable delays when the signal
there is not always a need for the local safety computed is lost and message repeating becomes necessary. The
algorithm to determine if a critical braking condition has been influence of the number of local users is represented in
issued: an accelerometer or brake sensor on each vehicle equation (9) by the random network congestion factor ν. For
could also determine early warning message broadcasting. But estimating the factor ν, in previous works [9] a model was
in case of an incident, the brake is not manoeuvred or late represented by an adaptation of the Pollaczek-Khinchin
manoeuvred by the driver. So it is recommendable to consider formula, where the queuing delay becomes
such an algorithm as secondary/backup safety information. �s
λ2 ∙θ
2
δ = θ�s + �s ) . (12)
2(1−λ⋅θ
IV. BUILDING THE ALGORITHM In equation (10), δ stands for data packet delay at queuing, θ�s
2
represents the average service time at first transmission, θ�s
The above presented algorithm is figured below, in a the average service time at second transmission
simplified version: (retransmission) and λ the arrival rate of messages at the
AQUIRING
INFORMATION
Vehicle ID, heading, position, speed,
message no.
queue. Considering a coefficient for the congestion of the ad-
hoc network due to multiple simultaneous transmission
Determine Received requests, we can further develop the model such as:
Vehicles Cluster Mrv
2� 2
�s + λ ∙θs
θ
δ �
2(1−λ⋅θs )
NO
Decision: Same
YES
Determine Vehicles ν= = , (13)
Reject vehicles IDs travelling
direction?
travelling in the same
direction cluster, MH η η
where η ∈ (0.8 ÷ 0.95) is a random coefficient directly
Decision: Does
vehicle belong to
Determine Vehicles dependant on the number of instant cluster users and τ�s is a
YES
geometrically distributed random variable. The service time is
in the interest area
safety interest
cluster, Mf
area?

proportional to the number of the transmission attempts and

inversely with the cluster (data packet) size. The coefficient η
Decision: Is
message
Compute safety
Reject vehicles IDs NO received from YES parameters

is containing this information.

vehicle
persistant?

Finally, considering also the local algorithm processing time

NO
Decision: Is
condition critical?
YES
WARN
BRAKE 𝜏𝑙𝑝2 (computing of received information, computing local
safety conditions and decision regarding whether issuing or
Fig. 2. Algorithm for context awareness safety information not an alarm), the total time until alarm information is
processing available becomes:
𝑇𝐴 = 𝜏𝑙𝑝1 + 𝜏𝑉2𝑋 + 𝜏𝑙𝑝2 . (14)
When estimating the delaying produced from the safety The solution has some advantages and disadvantages, as
information collection until its actual usage, it can be following:
considered a specific relationship. The onboard units of • Advantages:
vehicles in cluster 𝑀𝑑𝑙 (Fig. 1) – each mobile device use its - Single hopping / no need for communications
own sensors (satellite navigation sensing, odometer and infrastructure;
accelerometer) to detect dynamic information. Let’s denote - It obtains permanent data on average cluster speed
this delay for local processing τlp1 . This includes (1): position and relative speed/acceleration;
detection delay θd , dynamic parameters processing delay θp - Capability to detect situations where a driver did not
τlp1 = θd + θp (10) brake and a traffic incident has been triggered;
The success of the proposed solution relies also on the speed - Early warning in case of incident detection, helping
of the on-board information processing - therefore there is no reducing the casualties, injuries or vehicle damage;
need for infrastructure communications; however, it may - Possibility to extract information regarding vehicles
require prioritisation of emergency messages in some cases. gapping for ramp metering applications.
The next stage where time shifting occurs is the mobile V2X • Disadvantages:
communication network. Delays in information transmission, - All vehicles must be equipped with onboard units
in this case, are dependent on the density of users and and sensors;
availability of modern generation installations. The necessary - Computing safety conditions requires additional
timing;

371
 - The solution may need a specific communication emergency braking: if the system is only provided with early
protocol in order to avoid messages collisions warning (without self-braking), then a driver reaction time is
(similar to Self-Organising Time Division Multiple also to be considered:
Access used by ships’ AIS 1), but prioritisation may ∑𝑛 𝑛−1
𝑖=1 𝐷𝑖− ∑𝑗=1 𝑙𝑗
𝑇𝑐 = + 𝑇𝑑𝑟 (15)
be introduced for critical safety messages via 𝐶𝑠𝑎𝑣𝑔
dedicated time slots; with 𝑇𝑐 - time to collision, 𝐷𝑖 – distance between vehicles, 𝑙𝑗 –
- Prioritisation policies for relevant safety messages individual length of vehicles and 𝑇𝑑𝑟 driver reaction time.
might be a good advance for the implementation of Then the condition to receive in due time the collision
the proposed solution. warning message will become:
𝑇𝐴 < 𝑇𝐶 . (16)
V. CASE STUDY Assuming parameters in Tables 1 and 2, it results that a safety
distance from the first ahead traveling vehicle (in order to
The model analyses a case with vehicles platoon travelling at avoid collision) should be no less than 36.1 ∙ 𝑇𝐴 .
on a highway with an average speed of 130 km/h and
interspaced with 35 m each other, considering the parameters: VI. CONCLUSION
TABLE 1
In this paper an algorithm for clustering vehicles in order to
Vehicle’s dynamics related parameters
determine safety traffic conditions on a highway was
Speed over ground 130 km/h 36.1 m/s
Car length 4m presented, along with the communications links analysis and
(automobile) processes timings. Cooperative collision avoidance systems
Driver’s reaction min 0.75 s max 1.5 s are presently in development for the ITS on-board structures.
Deceleration Normal 4.9 m/s2 Emergency 8 m/s2 Compared to present solutions, the proposed algorithm may
DGPS accuracies Absolute position: Abs. heading: 1.5o also be used as synoptic imaging of relationship between a
(when available) 0.45 m Absolute time: 0.1 s central/critical node vehicle and the neighbouring vehicles, in
Speed sensors ±10 km/h ±2.78 m/s order to assess the safety driving conditions. Future research
accuracy (Odometer in this field will allow experimental results and improvements
and/or GPS) of the proposed solution.
TABLE 2
Communication/processing/driver reaction related parameters REFERENCES
Background ITS min 100 kb/s/veh max 1 Mb/s/veh
traffic messages [1] EU Commission, ”White paper on Transport – Roadmap to a
Local dynamic min 0.5s max 1 s Single European Transport Area – Towards a Competitive and
processing time Resource-Efficient Transport System”, Directorate General for
GPS rate 1s - Mobility and Transport, Luxembourg, 2011, ISBN 978-92-79-
Odometer rate 0.1 s - 18270-9.
Driver reaction min 1.5 s max 2.5 s [2] M. Emmelmann, B. Bochow, K. Kellum, Vehicular
Networking: Automotive Applications and Beyond, John Wiley
and Sons, 2010.
It is important to set the condition that the alarm delivery [3] C. M. Chou, C. Y. Li, W. M. Chien, K. C. Lan, “A Feasibility
delay to central node vehicle is short enough for allowing safe Study on Vehicle to Infrastructure Communication: WiFi vs.
manoeuvring the vehicle before collision (Fig. 3). WiMAX”, MDM’09, Conference Proceedings, pp. 397-398,
Taipei, Taiwan, 2009.
Traffic incident

Vehicle in

[4] A. Bohm, M. Jonsson, “Supporting Real-Time Data Traffic in

central node Vehicle i Vehicle 1 Vehicle 0

Dn Di D1

Speed alarming
Safety Critical Vehicle-to-Infrastructure Communication”, LCN
[km/h]

130
Event detection trigg
ers algorithm
2008, Conference Proceedings, pp. 614-621, Montreal, Canada,
Tdr Sharp reducing in
vehicle 0 cruising
2008.
100 TA
speed due to traffic
incident [5] S. Biswas, R. Tatchikou, F. Dion, ”Vehicle-to-Vehicle Wireless
Communication Protocols for Enhancing Highway Traffic
Da

Safety”, IEEE Communications Magazine, vol. 44, no. 1, pp.

50
74-82, 2006.
[6] M. R. Hafner, D. Cunningham, L. Caminiti, D. Del Vecchio,
Rapid growth of relative
speed is detected ”Cooperative Collision Avoidance at Intersections: Algorithms
Relative speed to vehicle 0
Incident
location and Experiments”, IEEE Transactions on ITS, vol. 14, no. 3,
0
Space [m] pp. 1162-1175, 2013.
[7] P. Fan, J. Haran, P. C. Nelson, ”Traffic Model for Clustering
Fig. 3. Diagram for incident early warning and speed control Algorithms in Vehicular Ad-Hoc Networks”, CCNC 2006,
Conference Proceedings, pp. 168-172, Las Vegas, NV, USA,
As it can be observed from the above figure, additional 2006.
delaying is introduced before the vehicle in central node starts [8] M. Minea, I. Bădescu, S. Dumitrescu, “Efficiency of
Multimodal Real-time Traffic and Travel Information Services
Employing Mobile Communications”, TELSIKS’11,
1
AIS – Automatic Identification System Conference Proceedings, pp. 765-768, Nis, Serbia, 2011.

372