Treating uncertainty in the estimation of speed from smartphone traffic probes

Before smartphone probes can be used to obtain instantaneous vehicle speeds and other dynamic characteristics, the accuracy of these estimates needs to be established under varying degrees of satellite signal interruption commonly found with varying road and traffic conditions. This paper presents the results of several vehicle tracking tests comparing smartphone speeds to benchmark values obtained for three types of routes. Benchmark values were obtained using a high frequency calibrated V-Box mounted on the test vehicle with four Android OS smartphone units. A relationship is established linking error in smartphone instantaneous speeds to the corresponding signal Circular Error Probable (CEP) range for different road and traffic conditions. This relationship is used to provide speed adjustment factors for the smartphone probe estimates subject to varying satellite signal strength. The CEP test is a reported GPS unit indicator of precision based on a known ground control benchmark. Smartphone speeds (adjusted and unadjusted) are compared to aggregate speed profiles from a stationary radar detector placed at a given location along SS106 in southern Italy. The smartphone devices were found to replicate closely the observed speed profiles obtained from the fixed detector station. Simple t-tests suggest that the means of the smartphone speeds for the unadjusted case differed significantly from the means obtained from the radar detector, when the smartphone estimates were adjusted for uncertainty (CEP range related), however, the difference in mean speeds between the smartphone probes and the radar detector profile was not found to be statistically significant.

[1]  Robert L. Bertini,et al.  Motorway traffic parameter estimation from mobile phone counts , 2006, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[2]  Xiangyu Zhou,et al.  Traffic Flow Analysis and Prediction Based on GPS Data of Floating Cars , 2013 .

[3]  Paul A. Zandbergen,et al.  Accuracy of iPhone Locations: A Comparison of Assisted GPS, WiFi and Cellular Positioning , 2009 .

[4]  Washington Y. Ochieng,et al.  URBAN ROAD TRANSPORT NAVIGATION: PERFORMANCE OF THE GLOBAL POSITIONING SYSTEM AFTER SELECTIVE AVAILABILITY , 2002 .

[5]  Elliott D. Kaplan Understanding GPS : principles and applications , 1996 .

[6]  Giuseppe Guido,et al.  Estimation of Safety Performance Measures from Smartphone Sensors , 2012 .

[7]  Chi-Chun Lo,et al.  A Traffic Information Prediction System Based on Global Position System-Equipped Probe Car Reporting , 2012 .

[8]  Baher Abdulhai,et al.  Fusing a Bluetooth Traffic Monitoring System With Loop Detector Data for Improved Freeway Traffic Speed Estimation , 2013, J. Intell. Transp. Syst..

[9]  Ronald Aylmer Sir Fisher,et al.  141: "The Coefficient of Racial Likeness" and the Future of Craniometry , 1936 .

[10]  Michel Bierlaire,et al.  Modeling route choice behavior from smart-phone GPS data , 2009 .

[11]  Hillel Bar-Gera,et al.  Evaluation of a Cellular Phone-Based System for Measurements of Traffic Speeds and Travel Times: A Case Study from Israel , 2007 .

[12]  Tom J. Chalko High accuracy speed measurement using GPS (Global Positioning System) , 2007 .

[13]  Baoji Wang Application of Smartphone for Intersection Performance Measurement , 2011 .

[14]  Hussein M. Magboub,et al.  Tracking Using an Inertial Measurement Unit (IMU) and GPS , 2012 .

[15]  Alexandre M. Bayen,et al.  Evaluation of traffic data obtained via GPS-enabled mobile phones: The Mobile Century field experiment , 2009 .

[16]  Sean J. Barbeau,et al.  Positional Accuracy of Assisted GPS Data from High-Sensitivity GPS-enabled Mobile Phones , 2011, Journal of Navigation.

[17]  H. Levene Robust tests for equality of variances , 1961 .

[18]  William Nelson Use of Circular Error Probability in Target Detection , 1988 .