Slashdot Mirror


Traffic Studied Using Computer-Linked Cars

mprindle writes "Yahoo News has an AP article about a system that links individual cars to analyze traffic patterns, which allows the drivers to avoid traffic jams and accidents. This system is part of the 'smart highway' initiatives. The data from the car is sent to a central server and from that data traffic patterns in a 40 mile radius. According to the article this technology is less expensive than using poll mounted antennas or ground sensors."

20 of 264 comments (clear)

  1. That's all well and good... by RyanFenton · · Score: 4, Interesting

    But how long until we can get some level of computer-controlled vehicles? Once the technology has matured a bit, I'd MUCH rather trust a reasonably engineered computerized system than the thousands of other drivers around me on my way about town. Not that I shouldn't be able to turn it off, but I think the concept would really grow once we switched the carpool lane to the auto-drive lane, and manual drivers learn to stay clear of the 80+mph traffic that flows on it.

    Ryan Fenton

    1. Re:That's all well and good... by serutan · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Not that I shouldn't be able to turn it off

      Personally I can't wait for the day when you can't turn it off. The sooner we get human drivers off the road the sooner the 40,000+ per year death toll will go down to the hundreds. A highway system full of self-driving cars would not only be safer, it would be self-optimizing. No need to worry about the best route home. Online traffic maps would be for entertainment purposes only. Just read your newspaper or lean back and take a nap.

    2. Re:That's all well and good... by MBCook · · Score: 4, Interesting
      That option to turn it off is the problem, as I see it.
      • If every car on the road is human controlled, things are fine (as we have it today).
      • If every car on the road is computer controlled, things are fine (computer knows what's happening)
      • If only some cars (possibly as few as one) are controlled by humans, things are MUCH more complex than if computers controll everything.

      It is this kind of thing that will make switiching over very tough. My guess it there will be special lanes at first (not unlike the carpool lane, speedpass lanes) that you drive into manually (or into an "entrence zone") and press a button and let the car take you in, and it takes you out (into an "exit zone") where the car puts you back into controll and you drive the rest of the way.

      As things progress, there are more and more of these lanes, and fewer and fewer "normal" lanes until you only have these lanes on highways and such. Then people only drive on streets (which would be safer anyways, no 80+ mphs speeds). From here you can make specific streets (the largest ones, one way streets, whatever) computer controlled only. Then you expand that untill you get to where cars are computer controlled only everwhere.

      All this would take years, to weed out the "normal" cars as people bought cars that had these functions, and that could be speed up by governement encouragement (tax breaks on buying them/gas/licenses/incentives/etc) and such.

      It will probably happen in our lifetimes (unless someone invents a transporter or an aircar or something that is computer driven from the start and those quickly supplant the car as the main mode of transportation). Should be interesting to watch.

      --
      Comment forecast: Bits of genius surrounded by a sea of mediocrity.
    3. Re:That's all well and good... by lakeland · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I'm inclined to disagree. I guess we'll find out which of us is right over the next 20 or so years :-)

      I cannot imagine any system in which the computer can assume all other objects which must be avoided are either computers or stationary. For a start there are things like kids or dogs running across the road. Then there are the changes in the road layout which someone forgot to report. Finally there are the broken computers (bit-flips) and crazy humans deciding to take the fast lane.

      The only way I can see it happening is with computers interacting fully with manually controlled cars and that it won't be until long after everyone has computer controlled cars that some lanes become computer exclusive (i.e. fast lanes).

      Still, it gets significantly complicated by the ligigeous dangers. If computers are restricted to a single lane and some idiot wanders in then that is their fault. However, if the computer is sharing a lane and some idiot slams on their brakes then I bet they'd try to blame the computer. Given that, maybe you'd get one approach developing throughout the world and another developing in America.

  2. Not to sound tinfoil hat-ish by ICECommander · · Score: 2, Interesting

    How long until insurance companies synchronize some of those devices they are testing that memorize your driving habits to some kind of wireless network? Although big brother would be watching, insurance monies would go to your pocket via safe driver discounts and analysis of vehicles' behavior right before accidents.

    --
    All your Sybase are belong to us.
  3. Possible flaw? by DJHeini · · Score: 2, Interesting

    But what if your car is stopped in the breakdown lane because of a flat tire or something? If you are the only wired car (from the relatively small pool) on that road at that time, will the system simply think that the road is at a standstill and tell everybody else to avoid that particular road?

  4. Nothing more than a kludge to a broken system by MarkRose · · Score: 5, Interesting

    It's funny how we spend so much time on alleviating traffic concerns, when it would be simpler to just abandon the car. It's to the point where it's often twice as fast and cheap to use public transport. When I'm in a large city, I park my car at a terminal, hop the train, and go. Not only do I not have to worry about traffic and the associated stress, I also buy back all the time I'd waste behind the wheel to catch up on reading and paperwork. And while using public transport can sometimes mean walking a block or two, it's no worse than finding a parking spot. Really, why, in North America, are we so fixated on the automobile for personal transport?

    --
    Be relentless!
    1. Re:Nothing more than a kludge to a broken system by hazem · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It's to the point where it's often twice as fast and cheap to use public transport.

      Not here in Portland, OR. We claim to have a great public transportation system. I live 12 miles from work and my commute takes me right through downtown. If I take the light-rail (which stops one block from my house, and stops 3 blocks from work), my commute time (not including walking) is a solid 1 hour and 20 minutes - each way.

      I can drive with no congestion in 20 minutes. The worst congestion I've seen has been a 40 minute commute. The cost in fuel compared to train tickets is about the same.

      That's one reason I like the automobile.

      Another reason is I don't particlarly like being packed in with a bunch of stinky loud-mouthed people. I've been puked on while riding the train. I've yet to be puked on while driving in my car.

      I just don't like spending an extra hour on a train wondering who it was that shit their pants and is smelling up the whole damn thing.

  5. Cell tracking by Chairboy · · Score: 3, Interesting

    No mention of the cell tracking method someone demo'ed a couple years ago? It used data from cell towers to monitor anonymized speed data for cell phones for a certain service, as measured by 2d direction finding the various towers could perform on a phone based on signal strength.

    The method, while it generated controversy on slashdot for the possible privacy implications, was a viable and cheap method to get this same data without adding specific new hardware.

  6. Re:Let's think about this for a second... by MBCook · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Nope. That won't be true for a few reasons.
    • First is that everyone will never have this technology. There will always be a few without it. But that's a minor reason.
    • Not everyone will follow the system's advice at all times.
    • As people follow the advice and go to side streets, the severity of the origional backup will decrease so that fewer people will bother to avoid it.
    • Not everyone CAN avoid the problem. There is no way for me to get from my house to the local college without traveling on the highway near my house. To avoid traveling that highway would be 30+ minute detour. Short of actually closing the road, it is usually better for me to just drive through it.
    • People will go elsewhere. If I'm planning to go to spot A for one errand and find out there is a traffic jam there, I'll go to spot B for a different errand and avoid that whole area. I may avoid it for the day (errand at A was unimportant), or just put it off 'till later (say after C and D) at which time the traffic may have subsided, and I may be in a position where instead of having to drive north to my destination through the traffic, I now must drive east so the traffic jam wouldn't be in my way.
    • Last is there is more than one alternate route. As the traffic jam happens, people will turn off who are near there because the system tells them too. As those streets start to slow, the system will warn people who get close to take different alternate routes avoiding both problems. And as the do that, the origional will clear up, leading me back to my first point.

    I don't think it would be a problem. I think it would help. Kansas City's Scout System provides simple info on some routes (big accident at X and Y, avoid) so that people can avoid it, and it does help. Plus because the message is on many signs (instead of right before the problem) you can avoid the problem from 1 mile away or 20.

    --
    Comment forecast: Bits of genius surrounded by a sea of mediocrity.
  7. This could be one piece of the solution by new2this · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Some of the previous post write this type of tech off without considering it could be used as one part of the solution. The only way to improve traffic is a system that effectively intergrates several options. One option, let's say mass transit, cannot do it alone.

    Imagin if you could tie this system into traffic signals. The combination of routing a certain set of vehicles to alternate routes along with changing the timing of lights on several routes could ease congestion in many cases. Most of the gridlock I see is not caused my a major accident but small incidents. Add an effecient system that deals with moving hazards off the road quickly,something like what they have on the autobahn we probably see huge back ups reduced. There will always be some gridlock but that does not mean a system has failed.

  8. Big Brother by MrOctogon · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Yeah, it sounds like a good idea now, but think about the privacy issues. If they can track where I am, where I'm going, and how fast, what's to stop a ticket for showing up in my mailbox everytime I go 1 mph over the speed limit? How long until some creep hacks the system and has access to everything he knows to stalk whoever he wants and do all kinds of no good? I don't want radio transmitters in my clothes, I don't want my cell phone to track me, and I don't want my car disclosing my personal information.

  9. Re:Let's think about this for a second... by SpaceLifeForm · · Score: 2, Interesting
    This can and will likely create problems. Once drivers commit to a route, based upon trafic at time 'X', and at time 'X+Y' an accident occurs, then at time 'X+Y+Z' the flow will be messed up potentially worse that without a recommended route.

    --
    You are being MICROattacked, from various angles, in a SOFT manner.
  10. Re:Let's think about this for a second... by tonsofpcs · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Ummm, no it wouldn't speed up everyone's journey home. Those of us who already take back roads everywhere that are NOT congested will get more congested routes. It will only speed up the journey of those taking the routes that are congested over the average point.

  11. Computer controlled traffic. by rice_burners_suck · · Score: 2, Interesting
    This is just the first step towards what will ultimately be the future of individual transportation: Cars that drive themselves.

    General Motors has been doing all sorts of experiments with cars that are driven by computer. They've shown some experiments on television where about eight or ten cars are driving eighty miles per hour on a road at "tailgating" distance from one another.

    The idea is not that computers are better at driving than humans, but is a solution to the problem that the driver of each vehicle sees only those cars that are immediately around him on the road. This means that if the vehicle in front of him is stopped, he must stop, too. Imagine a stoplight at an intersection. The light turns green, but you're behind ten cars, so by the time you start going, the light turns yellow again. Why? This is happening because you can't go until the car immediately in front of you goes, and the driver of that car suffers from the same problem. What if all the drivers communicated, so that when the light turns green, everybody would push the gas at exactly the same time? And more specifically, if everybody pushed the gas exactly the right amount so as to accelerate at exactly the same rate? Many more cars would make it through the intersection before the light turns red. Also, we'd all get where we're going a lot faster. That is currently impossible because there is no "central command", no way to create an overall driving strategy for everyone on a given road. Everybody does what he believes is best, and this causes all sorts of bottlenecks that shouldn't otherwise exist.

    A system that would essentially control all the vehicles on a road would do exactly that, and more. Now, I imagine that at first, this will only be available on a select few roads as an "experiment", and only people whose cars have the internal components to steer and control themselves at the instruction of external computers will be able to participate. I think the system would work by providing central control locations on a sort of grid, where each section of road has its own control system, and as cars leave one section of road and enter another, their information would be passed on to the next computer down the grid. Also, each vehicle would have to contain the additional sensors to "close the loop", essentially by providing an internal control inside the vehicle that would allow it to slow down or come to a stop in case there is something in the road that the central computer doesn't know about, or some other condition arises.

    This system would have tremendous benefits:

    • Instead of driving to work, people could spend the time watching television, reading a book, working on the day's reports, or otherwise conducting meaningful business. Gone will be the days of people yacking on their cellphones and crashing into you in the process.
    • The commute will be a lot shorter. With all cars controlled in this manner, a distance of twenty miles will perhaps take twenty minutes to travel. Currently, the traffic situations in many cities mean that a twenty mile commute to work is a multihour affair. In the greater Los Angeles area, for example, the distances really aren't that great. The distance from Santa Monica to Anaheim is barely thirty miles, yet during rush hour, it will take well over two hours to travel that distance.
    • There will be no need for traffic enforcement or traffic tickets. There will be no speed limits. The speed of vehicles on a road will be programmed for various driving conditions, and therefore, civic problems like traffic enforcement will be a thing of the past. The police will have time to fight "real" crime.
    • There will be a significant reduction in traffic accidents. Nobody will accept such a system if cars will routinely crash into each other or fly off the road. These systems will undergo significant experimentation to make sure that they are absolutely reliable, in much the same way as airline traffic control is mission critical. Even if the system goes haywire, this wi
  12. Re:Let's think about this for a second... by shawb · · Score: 4, Interesting

    It really isn't immaterial. Treating traffic flow as a fluid dynamics problem, it becomes apparent that reducing the flow of traffic will untangle traffic snarls, improving the flow. Basically, the more cars try to jam into a bottleneck, the slower traffic becomes, the slower it becomes, the worse the bottleneck becomes, untill traffic comes to a standstill with people still trying to jam themselves in. Sort of like early in rush hour, traffic flow is generally very heavy, but quick. Somebody having to hit their brakes, due to tailgating, being cut off, or not let into a lane causes small ripples of congestion which add up to the point that traffic flow comes to a standstill or at least a major slowdown. Appropriately reducing traffic flow at key points could eliminate or at least reduce congestion, without the costs (financial, social and environmental) of adding more lanes of concrete.

    Although teaching people how to drive and to actually use lanes appropriately would probably do more than any technological gizmo that we could create at this point.

    --
    I'll never make that mistake again, reading the experts' opinions. - Feynman
  13. Re:But.. by shawb · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Hmm... maybe we could eventually implement a system to allow for timeshifting traffic rather than spatial shifting. Reward people for driving in off peak hours (or rather penalize for driving in peak hours) such as higher tolls during rush hour in places that already have tolls. Reward companies that offer more flexible scheduling. Schedule semis/other large trucks to avoid rush hour traffic. Dynamic planning of delivery routes which incorporates traffic flow information. This would, however, take a lot more sociological engineering than a box that says "I recommend that you take a right at the next exit."

    --
    I'll never make that mistake again, reading the experts' opinions. - Feynman
  14. Re:But.. by Anne+Thwacks · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Of course, we in Europe already have penalties for driving during the day, deliveries done at night, and dynamic traffic congestion info used by virtually every professional driver. ("At the end of the road, turn right, TURN RIGHT") Our driving standards are generally higher than in America. We need this partly because out traffic lanes are half the width of yours (but the cars are smaller too), partly because the side roads are made deliberately impassable to through traffic (to save lives - our death toll is 10% of Americas per 1,000 population) and partly our population density is far higher than America: UK has 1/4 the population of the USA in an area the size of Kansas.

    We still have massive congestion and the occasional 4 hour gridlock, but its better that it would be otherwise. Of course, if there were alternative routes to take when you had a warning of congestion, it would help!

    The only real solution is for everyone to cycle, and so long as there is diesel oil or rape seed (Cannola) oil on the planet, I for one, won't get on a bike.

    --
    Sent from my ASR33 using ASCII
  15. Re:Let's think about this for a second... by Sparr0 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    We had that problem in Baldur's Gate. Solution? "Enhanced Pathfinding" in Baldur's Gate 2, makes the characters recompute their path every few steps. The only time youre ever committed to a path on the road is between exits on the interstate, and with proper information you should only get stuck behind those ~1% of the time that you do now.

  16. Re:But.. by Lumpy · · Score: 2, Interesting

    the solution to that is have someone go around smack ing the brain dead PHB's in the head that think that employees MUST be at work at 8:00 am and leave at 5:00pm.

    let workers swing their shift 1 hour or so from the max point. let me come in at 8:30 and leave at 5:30. or let me come in at 7:00 and leave at 4:00

    too many managers think that being there exactly at 8:00am is important, in reality it is not and has not been that way for decades. Also giving employees the ability to telecommute 1 day a week will also help. many MANY people can effectively work at home one day a week.

    until some sanity can be pounded into management we will continue the rat race that causes problems twice a day.

    --
    Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.