Transcript [.ppt]
ParkNet Drive-by Sensing of Road-Side Parking Statistics Sutha Mathur, Tong Jin, Nikhil Kasturirangan, Janani Chandrashekharan, Wenzhi Xue, Marco Gruteser, Wade Trappe Rutgers University Michael Betancourt UCF - EEL 6788 Dr. Turgut Overview 1. Introduction 2. Design Goals and Requirements 3. Prototype Development 4. Parking Space Detection 5. Occupancy Map 6. Mobility Study 7. Improvements 8. Conclusion Introduction - Problems • Traffic congestion costs tons of money o 4.2 billion lost hours o 2.9 billion gallons of gasoline wasted o Looking for parking contributes to these numbers • Lack of information o Hard to determine best prices for meters and where they should be placed o Current parking detection systems are costly Introduction - ParkNet • Drive-by Parking Monitoring o Uses ultrasonic sensor attached to the side of cars o Detects parked cars and vacant spaces • Attaches to vehicles that comb through a city (taxi, police, etc.) • Location accuracy based on GPS and environmental fingerprinting Introduction - Objectives • Demonstrating the feasibility of the mobile sensing approach including the design, implementation and evaluation of the system • Proposing and evaluating a method of environmental fingerprinting to increase location accuracies • Showing that if the mobility system were currently attached to operating taxis, it would operate with enough samples to determine parking availability Design Goals - Real-time Information • Improve traveler decisions with respect to mode of transportation • Suggesting parking spaces to users driving on the road • Allow parking garages to adjust their prices dynamically according to demmand • Improve efficiency of parking enforcement in systems that utilize single pay stations for multiple parking spots Design Goals - Parking Information • Space count o Sufficient for most parking applications • Occupancy Map o Useful for parking enforcemen Design Goals - Cost and Participation • Low-cost Sensors o Typical per spot parking management systems ranges from $250 to $800 per spot o Current systems are difficult to place in areas without marked parking spots • Low Vehicle Participation o Be able to function without a lot of cars fitted o Keep costs down Prototype Development - Hardware • Moxbotix WR1 rangefinder o Waterproof o Emits every 50ms o 12-255 inches • PS3 Eye webcam o 20 fps o Used for ground truth o Not in production • Garmin GPS o Readings come at 5Hz o Errors can be less than 3m • On-board PC o 1GHz CPU o 512 MB Ram o 20 GB HD o PCI WiFi card o 6 USB ports Prototype Development - Deployment • System was placed on 3 vehicles • 3 specific areas were marked off to be analyzed • Data was collected over a 2 month period • Drivers were oblivious to the data collection • All range sensor data is tagged with: Kernel-time, range, latitude, longitude, speed Prototype Development - Verification • PS3 Eye o Mounted just above the rangefinder o Took pictures at 20fps that were time tagged • Each picture was manually checked to see if there was a car parked • This was used to verify the data collected from the system Parking Space Detection - Challenges • Ultrasonic sensor does not have a perfectly narrow-width • GPS Errors • False alarms o Other impeding objects: Trees, people, recycling bins • Missed detections o Parked vehicles classified to be something other than a parked car Parking Space Detection - Dips • A "dip" is a change in the rangefinder readings which usually occurs when there is an object in view Two Cars Parked Together Far Close Parking Space Detection - Algorithms • Slotted Model o Determines which dips are classified as cars o Subtracts the total number of cars found with the total number of spaces available in the area • Unslotted Model o Determines which dips are classified as cars o Measures the distance between dips to see if it is large enough to fit a car • Training o 20% of the data is used for training o 80% of the data is used for evaluating performance Parking Space Detection - Slotted Slotted Model Accuracy Parking Space Detection - Unslotted Unslotted Model Accuracy Occupancy Map - GPS Error • Selected 8 objects and determined their absolute GPS position using Google Maps • Corresponded the GPS reading gathered from the trials to the objects • Used the reading from one object to correct the others Occupancy Map - Environmental Fingerprinting • F ixed objects in the environment used to increase positional accuracy • Recognition Walkthrough 1.GPS coordinates indicate system is near known object 2.Parses rangefinder readings 3.Determines what is not a parked car 4.Tries match the pattern with the known object 5.If object found, correct position if within 100m Mobility Study - Taxicab Routes • Public dataset of 536 taxicabs GPS position every 60 seconds • Routes were approximated by linear interpolation • Found that taxicabs spend the most time in downtown areas where parking is scarce • Determined the mean time between cabs visiting a particular street. Mobility Study - Taxicab Mean Time Greater San Francisco Downtown San Francisco Mobility Study - Cost Analysis • Current Cost: o Parknet: (~$400 per sensing vehicle) x (number of vehicles needed to get desired rate of detection) o Fixed Sensor: ($250-800 per space) x (number of spaces) • Uses opportunistic WiFi connections to transfer data • Easily managed due to the much smaller number of fixed sensors • Example o 6000 parking spots o Parknet: 300 cabs, 80% coverage every 25 minutes, $0.12 million o Fixed Sensor: $1.5 million Improvements • Multilane Roads o Moving cars could be determined by long dips o Rangefinder would need to be longer • Speed Limitations o Sensors currently work best at speeds below 40mph • Obtaining Parking Spot Maps o Difficult for large areas o Algorithms could determine location surroundings after data collection has been started • Using vehicles current proximity sensors Conclusion • Data collected o 500 miles over 2 months • Accuracy o 95% accurate parking space counts o 90% accurate parking occupancy maps • Frequency and Coverage o 536 vehicles equipped o Covers 85% every 25 minutes of a downtown area o Covers 80% every 10 minutes of a downtown area • Cost Benefits o Estimated factor of 10-15 times cheaper than current systems • Questions? Links Fixed Parking System (SFpark) http://sfpark.org http://vimeo.com/13867453