Name
Abstract | ||
|---|---|---|
An experiment was conducted using the InnovITS proving ground in Nuneaton. Thirty cars with volunteer drivers were asked to drive around a tight closed road circuit causing them to pass repeatedly through a cross-roads junction from all directions. The junction was signalized. In different test-runs of the experiment the traffic lights were controlled by either an automated fixed-time system or by a human using remote control. All vehicles in the test were instrumented using GPS and bluetooth. Video footage from two cameras was also recorded.recorded. The goal of the experiment was to collect data on the performance of human junction controllers. This was motivated by earlier work indicated that human controllers could perform well at this task in a simulated `computer game' environment. In particular this paper examines some of the issues that arise when trying to simulate an urban road junction in this manner. For example results are presented indicating differences in network performance depending on whether the drivers were instructed to follow a fixed route or a random route of their choice. Thus providing some guidance for maximizing the fidelity of this type of simulation in the future. The paper also presents a detailed analysis of the sensor data and video footage to measure the performance of the junction under the different modes of control. |
Year | DOI | Venue |
|---|---|---|
2013 | 10.1109/ITSC.2013.6728320 | ITSC |
Keywords | Field | DocType |
bluetooth,global positioning system,intelligent transportation systems,road traffic control,traffic engineering computing,gps,innovits,automated fixed-time system,cars,computer game,cross-roads junction,human junction controller,remote control,traffic light,urban road junction,data collection | Data collection,Fidelity,Remote control,Road traffic control,Simulation,Global Positioning System,Intelligent transportation system,Engineering,Bluetooth,Network performance | Conference |
ISSN | Citations | PageRank |
2153-0009 | 0 | 0.34 |
References | Authors | |
2 | 8 | |
Name | Order | Citations | PageRank |
|---|---|---|---|
| Simon Box | 1 | 10 | 2.57 |
| john leesmiller | 2 | 11 | 1.21 |
| james snowdon | 3 | 0 | 0.34 |
| j n hammond | 4 | 0 | 0.68 |
| Andrew Hamilton | 5 | 21 | 3.01 |
| shashank gupta | 6 | 60 | 11.35 |
| r eddie wilson | 7 | 1 | 1.05 |
| Ben Waterson | 8 | 10 | 2.57 |