Slashdot Mirror
SignalGuru Helps Drivers Avoid Red Lights
cylonlover writes "Researchers at MIT and Princeton have now devised a system, dubbed SignalGuru (PDF), that gathers visual data from the cameras of a network of dashboard-mounted smartphones and tells drivers the optimal speed to drive at to avoid waiting at the next set of lights." In their testing, the system saved drivers about 20 percent in fuel.
When I approach a red light, I don't continue driving and then stop, but start braking immediately and bring my speed down quickly. I then continue rolling at relatively low speed (with the shift stick in neutral, so the car doesn't brake on the engine). Often, I've still speed when the traffic light turns green. This works too if there are cars in front of you, but of course worse the longer the queue before the traffic light is, as they have to pick up speed.
I've always been waiting for the time that my TomTom gets info from the traffic lights to tell me the best speed, but alternative approaches would be fine too.
Bert
My iPhone told me to NAIL IT....can you give it the ticket?
In the interests of efficiency, most lights here in Melbourne have been converted to a triggered system.
The idea is that the main road (determined by some guru in a government department) has right of way and light changes are triggered by cars moving over sensors at the stop lines of the red lights, in some cases (though not all) they can detect 2 cars per lane. Of course the habit of many drivers to sit back a good car length from the stop lines often means that they do not get close enough to the coils in the road to properly trigger them and as a result you get a few drivers saying"to hell with it" and running through a red light after waiting for 10 minutes. It is really funny to then see the lights change a matter of moments after, in response to the car driving over the sense coils in the road.
The result is that there is no correct speed to catch the green light because there is no direct coordination between lights.
da da da dum indeed.
For as long as I can remember, I've always said that if the United States wanted to be serious about fuel consumption, that it would install roundabouts throughout it's cities.
The cost of the infrastructure switchover would be offset by the savings to tax payers in no time.
The government wouldn't like this because it means more money spent on infrastructure and less tax income from gasoline. In the end, less money fed to the machine.
It's good to see hackers like this out there trying to (and succeeding) in subverting the elite.
Sig: I stole this sig.
Instead pf reverse engineering the traffic lights timing, the responsible offices could simply document them, also on road signals.
All the stuff needed to reverse engineer the timings will produce more CO2 than simply say them.
Nonetheless, that idea is really smart.
Sent as ripples into the electromagnetic field. No single photon has been harmed in the process.
Yes it could ... if drivers scrupulously respected the indications of the magic box on the dashboard.
If you look at all the available safety systems coming in the next generation of cars:
- automatic braking
- infrared night vision
- reverse backup sensors
- adaptive cruise control
- lane departure warning systems
- traction control systems
- electronic stability control
- emergency brake assist
- cornering brake control
- precrash system
- automated parking
It is just a couple of steps away from turning you into a mere supervisor of your car's automatic driving.
If you add fuel efficiency to the safety concerns, it will add a new set or constraints that will give automatic driving an advantage over human driving.
When his defense asked, "Which computer has Jon Johansen trespassed upon?" the answer was: "His own."
tells drivers the optimal speed to drive at to avoid waiting at the next set of lights."
The problem is that the speed to travel at to not stop at the next set of lights could be 12 km/h or 1.5 times the speed limit. It is hardly ever a speed you are actually going to travel at. We had a system in Melbourne which did this. They had to change it to not display a speed above the speed limit and then the displays showed stupidly low speeds.
http://michaelsmith.id.au
No.... When your engine breaks, you use no fuel. It's pretty obvious, really.
"City hall" in German is "Rathaus" Kinda explains a few things......
Don't forget: when you're perfectly synchronized with the traffic lights at 30 mph, you are also at 60 and 120 :)
"A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
Roads are not for "saving" on fuel or brakes. Roads are for getting from A to B.
You selfish "saving" on fuel leads to you occupying extra road time-space. You are basically hogging it, take it from other drivers, which leads to heavier traffic, in fact, very often it will lead to creation of extra traffic jams.
Instead of that technology, they should invent technology that will get medieval on the asses of those local government official who intentionally program traffic light system to slow drivers.
I do not believe in karma. "Funny"=-6. Do good and forbid evil. Yours, Oft-Offtopic Flamebaiting Troll.
I guess it depends.
I live in the Netherlands, where a lot of traffic lights have been replaced by roundabouts and it improves the flow of traffic a lot. I've rarely had dangerous situations, in fact the false sense of safety that a traffic light gives is probably more dangerous. Atleast you're paying attention when crossing a roundabout. With traffic-lights people just floor it whenever they get a green light, regardless the idiot that just crossed a red light.
Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
Put more sensors and "intelligence" in the traffic lights and let people drive around as normal.
Traffic light systems are really stupid, last night I was driving home at 2am and came to some traffic lights, they changed to red and there was no other cars around.
Put more sensors and "intelligence" in the traffic lights and let people drive around as normal.
You've got that completely arse about.
Put more intelligence into the drivers so they stop doing stupid things. People thinking that doing 80 (Kph) in a 60 zone is normal are the problem, not traffic lights. In the vast majority of cities traffic lights and speed limits are designed to work together to ensure traffic flows correctly, when Dingbat McHoon drives at 90 in a 60 zone he is the problem, not the traffic lights.
Driving is somewhere where the Dunning-Kruger effect is very obvious.
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
Socialism keeps getting redefined. Yours is not the original definition.
...the future crusty old bastards are already drinking the Kool-Aid.