## 3 Results and Discussion
### Results and Discussion of Experiment 3
However, the maximum densities and the corresponding minimum speeds differ; in S1, the maximum density is 0.0240 veh/m and the corresponding minimum speed is 6.0352 m/s; in S2, the maximum density is 0.0277 veh/m and the corresponding minimum speed is 5.4318 m/s; in S3, the maximum density is 0.0446 veh/m and the corresponding minimum speed is 3.4570 m/s. Even though the DS patterns of S1, S2, and S3 look similar, the DS pattern of S2 is extended further to the right (and further down) than the DS pattern of S1, and the DS pattern of S3 is extended further to the right (and further down) than the DS pattern of S2. This implies higher densities and lower speeds in S2 than in S1, and higher densities and lower speeds in S3 than in S2 (or S1). After period 200 in S1, it takes 4 periods for the network to empty, in S2 it takes 7 periods, and in S3 it takes 38 periods (due to the congestion). In Figure 24, it can be observed that according to the modeled data in S3, the critical density is reached at 0.02672 veh/m (from this value the flow starts to decrease), which corresponds to a maximum flow of 0.12923 veh/s; indeed, Figure 20 shows that the density in S3 is notoriously higher than that exhibited by S1 and S2 from period 135 to 213, which is the approximate start and end, respectively, of the congestion (in this interval as density increases, flow decreases). In addition, considering S3 and the interval \([135,213]\), Figure 19 shows that the network speed goes down and then goes up, Figure 20 shows that the network density \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c} \hline \hline \multicolumn{1}{c}{**Compared**} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{**Comparing the Speed**} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{**Comparing Capacity**} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{**Comparing Capacity**} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{**MFDs**} \\ \multicolumn{1}{c}{**Simulations**} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{**Range(m/s)**} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{**(veh/s)**} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{**(veh/m)**} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{**Verdict**} \\ \hline S1 and S2 & \(\mathrm{D_{Speed}^{SIS2}}=0.0446\) & \(\mathrm{D_{flow}^{SIS2}}=0.00132\) & \(\mathrm{D_{density}^{SIS2}}=0.002248\) & similar \\  & (similar) & (similar) & (dissimilar) & similar \\ S2 and S3 & \(\mathrm{D_{Speed}^{SIS3}}=0.0298\) & \(\mathrm{D_{flow}^{SIS3}}=0.00633\) & \(\mathrm{D_{density}^{SIS3}}=0.004273\) & similar \\  & (similar) & (similar) & (dissimilar) & similar \\ S1 and S3 & \(\mathrm{D_{Speed}^{SIS3}}=0.024\) & \(\mathrm{D_{flow}^{SIS3}}=0.005009\) & \(\mathrm{D_{density}^{SIS3}}=0.006521\) & similar \\  & (similar) & (similar) & (dissimilar) & similar \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 7: Comparing simulations through metrics: experiment 4. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c} \hline \hline \multicolumn{1}{c}{**Sim**} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{**Period 1 to 40**} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{**Period 41 to 80**} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{**Period 80 to 204**} \\ \hline \multirow{8}{*}{**S1 and S2**} & AVG speed (m/s) & 8.28993901306706 & 7.97190484356544 & 7.15742558895287 \\  & STD speed (m/s) & 0.524544738286513 & 0.289676483985101 & 0.641752021714726 \\  & AVG density (veh/m) & 0.0111114426925968 & 0.01329403990041025 & 0.0194440957389438 \\  & STD density (veh/m) & 0.00932828443886002 & 0.000697463584430562 & 0.00223166553880638 \\  & AVG flow (veh/s) & 0.0767 goes up and then goes down, and Figure 21 shows that the network flow goes down and then goes up. Noticeably, in the range \([164,200]\), S2 presents higher densities and lower speeds than S1 (see Figures 19 and 20), indicating that S2 was closer to being congested than S1. In S3, from period 81 (when the input flow on each network entrance is equal to high_flow), it takes around 82.5 min (55 periods) for the network to become congested at period 135.