Comparing the GPS capabilities of the iPhone 4 and iPhone 3G for vehicle tracking using FreeSim_Mobile

T. Menard, Jeffrey Miller
{"title":"Comparing the GPS capabilities of the iPhone 4 and iPhone 3G for vehicle tracking using FreeSim_Mobile","authors":"T. Menard, Jeffrey Miller","doi":"10.1109/IVS.2011.5940500","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this paper, we present a comparison between the Apple iPhone 3G™ [2] and the iPhone 4™ [2] using the real-time vehicle tracking application FreeSim_Mobile [24]. The built-in GPS receiver and web capabilities of the iPhone™, coupled with a V2I architecture, are used to send a continuous flow of data to a central server for processing by FreeSim [13–15], which is a real-time traffic simulator. The proportional model algorithm [18] is then used to determine the time to traverse a roadway in order to report in real-time the current flow of traffic. At the University of Alaska Anchorage, we currently have vehicle tracking devices installed in 80 probe vehicles that traverse the Anchorage area. Due to the high cost associated with vehicle tracking devices, it is difficult to penetrate a large vehicular network on a finite amount of money, so we must look towards other available technologies, such as the constantly-expanding cellular network. In this paper we look at the iPhone 4™ capability of reporting accurate and reliable locations and compare it to the recent study of the iPhone 3G™ [24]. Drivers equipped with an iPhone 4™ cellular phone and a vehicle tracking device manually timed how long it took to travel along a 0.99 mile/1.59 kilometer section of roadway. The vehicle tracking device and the iPhone 4™ report speed and location every 10 seconds whereas the iPhone 3G™ reported every 8 seconds [24]. From this data, we calculated the amount of time to traverse the test section of roadway using the proportional model algorithm [18] and compared it to the actual amount of time it took to traverse the test section of roadway as manually timed. We found that the vehicle tracking device had an average error factor of 4.94% from the actual time to traverse the section of roadway (as determined by the stopwatch), whereas the iPhone 4™ was found to have an error factor of 1.10%. The outcome of the case study is used to determine that the iPhone 4™ has higher accuracy than a vehicle tracking device, though it is important to note that the iPhone™ is more limited than a device attached to a vehicle since it can only report its location. If paired with another third party OBD device, however, it can also send the same information as a vehicle tracking device.","PeriodicalId":117811,"journal":{"name":"2011 IEEE Intelligent Vehicles Symposium (IV)","volume":"29 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2011-06-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"32","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2011 IEEE Intelligent Vehicles Symposium (IV)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/IVS.2011.5940500","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 32

Abstract

In this paper, we present a comparison between the Apple iPhone 3G™ [2] and the iPhone 4™ [2] using the real-time vehicle tracking application FreeSim_Mobile [24]. The built-in GPS receiver and web capabilities of the iPhone™, coupled with a V2I architecture, are used to send a continuous flow of data to a central server for processing by FreeSim [13–15], which is a real-time traffic simulator. The proportional model algorithm [18] is then used to determine the time to traverse a roadway in order to report in real-time the current flow of traffic. At the University of Alaska Anchorage, we currently have vehicle tracking devices installed in 80 probe vehicles that traverse the Anchorage area. Due to the high cost associated with vehicle tracking devices, it is difficult to penetrate a large vehicular network on a finite amount of money, so we must look towards other available technologies, such as the constantly-expanding cellular network. In this paper we look at the iPhone 4™ capability of reporting accurate and reliable locations and compare it to the recent study of the iPhone 3G™ [24]. Drivers equipped with an iPhone 4™ cellular phone and a vehicle tracking device manually timed how long it took to travel along a 0.99 mile/1.59 kilometer section of roadway. The vehicle tracking device and the iPhone 4™ report speed and location every 10 seconds whereas the iPhone 3G™ reported every 8 seconds [24]. From this data, we calculated the amount of time to traverse the test section of roadway using the proportional model algorithm [18] and compared it to the actual amount of time it took to traverse the test section of roadway as manually timed. We found that the vehicle tracking device had an average error factor of 4.94% from the actual time to traverse the section of roadway (as determined by the stopwatch), whereas the iPhone 4™ was found to have an error factor of 1.10%. The outcome of the case study is used to determine that the iPhone 4™ has higher accuracy than a vehicle tracking device, though it is important to note that the iPhone™ is more limited than a device attached to a vehicle since it can only report its location. If paired with another third party OBD device, however, it can also send the same information as a vehicle tracking device.
使用FreeSim_Mobile比较iPhone 4和iPhone 3G的车辆跟踪GPS功能
在本文中,我们使用实时车辆跟踪应用程序FreeSim_Mobile[24]对苹果iPhone 3G™[2]和iPhone 4™[2]进行了比较。iPhone™内置的GPS接收器和web功能,加上V2I架构,用于将连续的数据流发送到中央服务器,由FreeSim进行处理[13-15],这是一个实时交通模拟器。然后使用比例模型算法[18]来确定穿越道路的时间,以便实时报告当前的交通流量。在阿拉斯加安克雷奇大学,我们目前在穿越安克雷奇地区的80辆探测车上安装了车辆跟踪设备。由于车辆跟踪设备的高成本,很难在有限的资金上渗透到大型车辆网络中,因此我们必须寻求其他可用的技术,例如不断扩展的蜂窝网络。在本文中,我们研究了iPhone 4™报告准确可靠位置的能力,并将其与iPhone 3G™的最新研究进行了比较[24]。司机们配备了iPhone 4™手机和车辆跟踪装置,手动计算在0.99英里/1.59公里的路段上行驶所需的时间。车辆跟踪设备和iPhone 4™每10秒报告一次速度和位置,而iPhone 3G™每8秒报告一次[24]。根据这些数据,我们使用比例模型算法[18]计算出了穿越巷道试验段所需的时间,并将其与手动计时的实际穿越巷道试验段所需的时间进行了比较。我们发现,车辆跟踪装置与穿越路段的实际时间(由秒表确定)的平均误差系数为4.94%,而iPhone 4™的误差系数为1.10%。案例研究的结果用于确定iPhone 4™比车辆跟踪设备具有更高的准确性,但重要的是要注意,iPhone™比附加在车辆上的设备更受限制,因为它只能报告其位置。然而,如果与另一个第三方OBD设备配对,它也可以发送与车辆跟踪设备相同的信息。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信