Performance Evaluation and Correction Functions for Automated Pedestrian and Bicycle Counting Technologies

Frank R. Proulx, R. Schneider, L. Miranda-Moreno
{"title":"Performance Evaluation and Correction Functions for Automated Pedestrian and Bicycle Counting Technologies","authors":"Frank R. Proulx, R. Schneider, L. Miranda-Moreno","doi":"10.1061/(ASCE)TE.1943-5436.0000828","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Automated counting technologies are one of the fastest growing sources of data in the non-motorized transportation field. Although automated counts make it possible to collect data for longer time periods and to document temporal variations in volumes more effectively than manual counts, all of the technologies being used are subject to systematic miscount rates that must be accounted for to generate accurate volume estimates. In this paper, accuracy and precision rates are tested for six automated pedestrian and bicycle counting technologies: passive infrared, active infrared, radio beam, pneumatic tubes, inductive loops, and piezoelectric strips. For some technologies, multiple products are tested. Counting devices were installed at 13 sites in seven cities to introduce variation in environmental (weather) conditions and volume levels, and manual validation counts were conducted based on video footage taken at each of the test sites. Correction functions are developed for each technology to increase accuracy of volume estimates. Various environmental conditions including temperature, rain, and lighting are tested in the development of the correction functions. For most technologies, a net undercount effect was observed that appears to worsen at higher volumes. Average error rates (average percentage deviation) for the tested technologies range from 0.55% for inductive loops to −17.38% for pneumatic tubes. However, after applying correction functions accuracy improves for nearly all technologies. Language: en","PeriodicalId":305908,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Transportation Engineering-asce","volume":"18 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"13","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Transportation Engineering-asce","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)TE.1943-5436.0000828","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 13

Abstract

Automated counting technologies are one of the fastest growing sources of data in the non-motorized transportation field. Although automated counts make it possible to collect data for longer time periods and to document temporal variations in volumes more effectively than manual counts, all of the technologies being used are subject to systematic miscount rates that must be accounted for to generate accurate volume estimates. In this paper, accuracy and precision rates are tested for six automated pedestrian and bicycle counting technologies: passive infrared, active infrared, radio beam, pneumatic tubes, inductive loops, and piezoelectric strips. For some technologies, multiple products are tested. Counting devices were installed at 13 sites in seven cities to introduce variation in environmental (weather) conditions and volume levels, and manual validation counts were conducted based on video footage taken at each of the test sites. Correction functions are developed for each technology to increase accuracy of volume estimates. Various environmental conditions including temperature, rain, and lighting are tested in the development of the correction functions. For most technologies, a net undercount effect was observed that appears to worsen at higher volumes. Average error rates (average percentage deviation) for the tested technologies range from 0.55% for inductive loops to −17.38% for pneumatic tubes. However, after applying correction functions accuracy improves for nearly all technologies. Language: en
行人和自行车自动计数技术的性能评价和校正功能
自动计数技术是非机动运输领域增长最快的数据来源之一。尽管与人工计数相比,自动计数可以收集更长时间的数据,并更有效地记录体积的时间变化,但所使用的所有技术都存在系统的错误计数率,必须考虑到这些错误计数率才能产生准确的体积估计。本文测试了六种行人和自行车自动计数技术:被动红外、主动红外、无线电波束、气动管、电感回路和压电条的准确度和精密度。对于某些技术,需要测试多个产品。在7个城市的13个试验点安装了计数装置,以介绍环境(天气)条件和音量水平的变化,并根据在每个试验点拍摄的视频片段进行人工验证计数。为每种技术开发了校正功能,以提高体积估计的准确性。在校正功能的开发过程中,测试了各种环境条件,包括温度,雨水和照明。对于大多数技术,观察到的净计数不足效应似乎在更高的数量下恶化。测试技术的平均错误率(平均百分比偏差)范围从感应回路的0.55%到气动管的- 17.38%。然而,在应用校正功能后,几乎所有技术的精度都有所提高。语言:在
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