Examining the potential of floating car data for dynamic traffic management

Traditional traffic monitoring systems are mostly based on road side equipment (RSE) measuring traffic conditions throughout the day. With more and more GPS-enabled connected devices, floating car data (FCD) has become an interesting source of traffic information, requiring only a fraction of the RSE infrastructure investment. While FCD is commonly used to derive historic travel times on individual roads and to evaluate other traffic data and algorithms, it could also be used in traffic management systems directly. However, as live systems only capture a small percentage of all traffic, its use in live operating systems needs to be examined. Here, the authors investigate the potential of FCD to be used as input data for live automated traffic management systems. The FCD in this study is collected by a live country-wide FCD system in the Netherlands covering 6-8% of all vehicles. The (anonymised) data is first compared to available road side measurements to show the current quality of FCD. It is then used in a dynamic speed management system and compared to the installed system on the studied highway. Results indicate the FCD set-up can approximate the installed system, showing the feasibility of a live system

Parallel and Distributed Performance of a Depth Estimation Algorithm

Expansion of dataset sizes and increasing complexity of processing algorithms have led to consideration of parallel and distributed implementations. The rationale for distributing the computational load may be to thin-provision computational resources, to accelerate data processing rate, or to efficiently reuse already available but otherwise idle computational resources. Whatever the rationale, an efficient solution of this type brings with it questions of data distribution, job partitioning, reliability, and robustness. This paper addresses the first two of these questions in the context of a local cluster-computing environment. Using the CHRT depth estimator, it considers active and passive data distribution and their effect on data throughput, focusing mainly on the compromises required to maintain minimal communications requirements between nodes. As metric, the algorithm considers the overall computation time for a given dataset (i.e., the time lag that a user would experience), and shows that although there are significant speedups to be had by relatively simple modifications to the algorithm, there are limitations to the parallelism that can be achieved efficiently, and a balance between inter-node parallelism (i.e., multiple nodes running in parallel) and intranode parallelism (i.e., multiple threads within one node) for most efficient utilization of available resources