## 4 Results and Discussion
### Network Testing
By reducing the flow from east to west, a critical region in the system, the system handles peak traffic volumes (between 500 and 2000 s) effectively. During these peak periods, the  
Figure 11: Comparison of trends over time for vehicle halting sessions at intersections in standard versus rerouting symmetrical and asymmetrical scenarios: (**a**) Intersection C0, (**b**) Intersection C1, and (**c**) Intersection C2. number of stopped vehicles across the three junctions averages around 50, demonstrating the system's ability to maintain stability even under unbalanced flow conditions. Compared to the high queue levels observed in the standard scenario at junctions C0, C1, and C2, the rerouting scenario reduces average traffic pressure by 66%, 50%, and 75%, respectively. These results highlight the significant efficiency gains provided by rerouting, making arterial roads more effective and improving overall traffic flow. Careful management of the 200 m road connecting C2 to C1 is critical, as its limited capacity can exacerbate congestion at C1. By implementing dynamic rerouting and optimized phase activations, the system ensures balanced traffic distribution, minimizing pressure on all intersections. Figure 12 presents the number of halted pedestrians at each intersection for both the standard and rerouting scenarios. A comparison of pedestrian traffic between these scenarios reveals that the rerouting scenario generally results in fewer pedestrians waiting in designated areas. The most significant differences between scenarios occur at intersections C0 and C2, where the rerouting scenario more effectively utilizes the pedestrian phase, enabling smoother pedestrian flow. At C1, the critical junction with the highest overall pedestrian volume, there are more halted pedestrians than at C0 and C2. However, even at C1, the rerouting scenario consistently shows fewer waiting pedestrians compared to the standard scenario. While the rerouting scenario does not explicitly prioritize pedestrian flow, it indirectly benefits pedestrians by reducing vehicle queues. With fewer vehicles clogging the intersections, the system can more frequently activate pedestrian phases, facilitating safer and more efficient crossings. The pedestrian phase serves a dual purpose: it not only manages pedestrian flow but also helps regulate vehicle traffic on critical roads connecting intersections. As such, pedestrians indirectly benefit from improved traffic flow in the rerouting scenario. However, the overall reduction in halted pedestrian numbers is modest. This is because activating a pedestrian phase does not guarantee that large numbers of pedestrians will cross, as the availability of pedestrians in waiting zones varies. Factors like smaller groups, fewer pedestrians arriving during active phases, or inconsistent arrival patterns influence this variability. Peaks in pedestrian halting sessions are closely tied to crossing periods, with the size of these peaks reflecting congestion levels and pedestrian reactions to connected vehicle  
Figure 12: Comparison of trends over time for pedestrian halting sessions at intersections in standard versus rerouting symmetrical and asymmetrical scenarios: (**a**) intersection C0, (**b**) intersection C1, and (**c**) intersection C2. traffic. The rerouting scenario exhibits smaller peaks compared to the standard scenario, where peaks are more pronounced, indicating higher stress levels. Between 500 and 1000 s, the rerouting scenario reduces average pedestrian pressure by 25%, effectively alleviating congestion during peak traffic times when pedestrian and vehicle wait times overlap. This reduction in pressure significantly minimizes the risk of pedestrian run-overs, enhancing safety performance and underscoring the importance of rerouting in traffic management. The asymmetric rerouting scenario shows slightly higher pedestrian waiting numbers at C0 and C2 compared to the rerouting scenario.