LIDSA: Cognitive Arbitration for Signal-Free Autonomous Intersection Management
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Large language models (LLMs) show strong potential for Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS), particularly in tasks requiring situational reasoning and multi-agent coordination. These capabilities make them well suited for cooperative driving, where rule-based approaches struggle in complex and dynamic traffic environments. Intersection management remains especially challenging due to conflicting right-of-way demands, heterogeneous vehicle priorities, and vehicle-specific kinematic constraints that must be resolved in real time. However, existing approaches typically use LLMs as auxiliary components on top of signal-based systems rather than as primary decision-makers. Signal controllers remain vehicle-agnostic, reservation-based methods lack intent awareness, and recent LLM-based systems still depend on signal infrastructure. In addition, LLM inference latency limits their use in sub-second control settings. We propose LIDSA (LLM-Based Intent-Driven Speed Advisory), a signal-free cognitive arbitration framework for autonomous intersection management. LIDSA uses an LLM to reason over declared vehicle intents, incorporating priority classes, queue pressure, and energy preferences. We evaluate LIDSA against fixed-cycle control, SCATS, AIM, and GLOSA across varying traffic loads. Results show that LIDSA reduces mean control delay by up to 89.1% and maintains Level of Service C while all non-LLM baselines degrade to Level of Service F. Under near-saturated demand, LIDSA reduces mean waiting time by 93% and peak queue length by 60.6% relative to fixed-cycle control. It also lowers fuel consumption by up to 48.8% and achieves 86.2% intent satisfaction, compared to 61.2% for the best non-LLM method. These results demonstrate that LLM-based reasoning can enable real-time, signal-free intersection management.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 8 of its 41 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 12 May 2026.
Builds on
8 of 41 references.
References · 8
- 2021Evaluating Large Language Models Trained on Codecited by 8,053
- 2020Measuring Massive Multitask Language Understandingcited by 7,768
- 2023Lost in the Middle: How Language Models Use Long Contextscited by 3,383
- 2023LLMLight: Large Language Models as Traffic Signal Control Agentscited by 73
- 2024iLLM-TSC: Integration reinforcement learning and large language model for traffic signal control policy improvementcited by 23
- 2024Large Language Models (LLMs) as Traffic Control Systems at Urban Intersections: A New Paradigmcited by 12
- 2020Influence of CAV Clustering Strategies on Mixed Traffic Flow Characteristics: An Analysis of Vehicle Trajectory Datacited by 5
- 2026AgentDrive: An Open Benchmark Dataset for Agentic AI Reasoning with LLM-Generated Scenarios in Autonomous Systemscited by 4
Built on by
Not cited yet.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2026DriveCombo: Benchmarking Compositional Traffic Rule Reasoning in Autonomous Driving
- 2025Traffic-R1: Reinforced LLMs Bring Human-Like Reasoning to Traffic Signal Control Systems
- 2026Reason--Imagine--Act: Closed-Loop LLM Decision Making with World Models for Autonomous Driving
- 2025Multi-Agent Autonomous Driving Systems with Large Language Models: A Survey of Recent Advances
- 2026CoLMIN: LLM-based Multi-Decision Path Negotiation for Cooperative Autonomous Driving
- 2025CoLLMLight: Cooperative Large Language Model Agents for Network-Wide Traffic Signal Control
- 2026TrafficClaw: A Generalizable LLM Agent in the Unified Physical Environment for Urban Traffic Control
- 2026ProcessLight: Process Supervision for Large Language Model Based Traffic Signal Control