Ann Arbor plays home to the University of Michigan, and with the football games, Kid Rock concerts, and daily commuters comes traffic, and lots of it. On the average weekday, the 125,000-person town swells to hold 200,000 people, most of whom travel in by personal car. The city is exploring buses, commuter rail, and carpool options to clear up its roads, but knows it can't drive the car out of its home state anytime soon. So it turned to tech to manage its streets.
Intelligent traffic systems have been adjusting traffic lights and signs to smooth out congestion in real time for more than three decades, all over the world. More than 100 cities, including London, Santiago, and Toronto, use the same car-corralling program as Ann Arbor.
Now, that tech is getting smarter—and it's winning the battle. New numbers from Siemens, which co-owns the Ann Arbor program with UK company Imtech, show the city's more advanced software puts a serious dent in local traffic.
Cities program your standard traffic light by observing traffic patterns for a few hours, extrapolating what local vehicles need, and then letting lights do their thing for years, even decades. More advanced systems will be able to sense if a vehicle is stopped, and turn the light green to help it along. The most advanced systems—like Ann Arbor's—will know how many vehicles are stopped, in which lane, and how many vehicles are coming down the pike.
(Score: 2) by Snotnose on Monday March 06 2017, @03:00AM (1 child)
Some 40 years ago the city (El Cajon) made a huge campaign due to synchronizing all the traffic lights so people didn't have to stop so often. That was contrary to my experience, on all the synchronized roads I hit every fricken light yellow such that I had to stop.
Turned out, they were after people pushing yellow lights and the city made a shit ton of money off yellow light runners who didn't quite beat the red.
/ now, they let you turn left on red if there is no traffic
// Like Phoenix did in the 80s
/// more intersections need to let you hang a left when there is no traffic
//// Mast hanging a left to Park Center Drive, I'm looking at you
When the dust settled America realized it was saved by a porn star.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Monday March 06 2017, @03:19AM
In this case, 75000 extra persons/event may push the council to play nice.
If it doesn't, the best thing that can happen is loss of visitors (and sale taxes), the worse being some tens of thousands of pissed-off people.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Monday March 06 2017, @03:11AM (1 child)
Wait until the traffic fights back with vulnerabilities (eg a hacker decides to slam the brakes of only one make/model of a popular car during rush hour)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by nobu_the_bard on Monday March 06 2017, @07:43PM
Lot of places near here have installed these devices on traffic lights that allow emergency vehicles to shift the lights to green.
It's been a mixed bag. Tons of non-emergency vehicle operators obtained them and I've seen non-emergency uses than emergency uses. It was bad enough in some spots they took the devices down. I do worry that a "smart" device is one that can be fooled, and there's an inexhaustible interest in fooling them.
It's more typical around here that at weird hours like 2 AM - 4 AM, traffic lights switch to flashing red and operate like stop signs. Otherwise they typically are tuned to the most common traffic patterns for that time of day. This mooostly works out, excepting one specific poorly laid out intersection that tends to turn red with such timing that cars get stranded in the intersection and gridlock happens every week day around 6 PM...
(Score: 1) by anubi on Monday March 06 2017, @03:45AM (9 children)
Where I live seems plagued with ill-timed traffic lights. If I ran my car's timing so poorly, it flat would not run.
By now, with all the cameras out all over the place, and facial recognition out so sophisticated it can even identify a particular individual, I am really frustrated to be compelled to stop for some device so dumb as to stop me for absolutely nothing!
With today's technology and mesh-networking capability, it sure seems moot to have all these sensor loops in the road, which never seem to sense motorcyclists or verify pedestrian traffic. We have really good imaging technology so cheap its on throw away phones.
How about a standard traffic-light design that one equips with cameras and a link addresses for neighboring lights, and use adaptive algorithms to optimize traffic timing? I worked with a guy years ago that was one of the pioneers of what we today know as spread-spectrum... the same "transversal filter" that was used to remove multipath distortions was just an array of delay elements which mimicked alternate paths the signal took, which created intersymbol interference, and neatly nulled them out. A variant could easily do the same thing with traffic knowing the delays from one intersection to the next, then communicate the delta timing info up and down to time the lights optimally as they make their best guess and correct. ( like a multi-dimensional version of the maximal power point tracker solar arrays use in their power converter ).
I find it extremely annoying that everyone is required to jump through so many hoops for compliance with carbon emissions, yet we have such poorly timed traffic signals mandating the waste of the kinetic energy we paid atmospheric emissions for.
"Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." [KJV: I Thessalonians 5:21]
(Score: 3, Informative) by Runaway1956 on Monday March 06 2017, @05:35AM (4 children)
"sensor loops in the road, which never seem to sense motorcyclists or verify pedestrian traffic."
Motorcycles - just treat that stubborn stop light as a stop sign. It doesn't know you're there, so come to a complete stop, look all directions, then proceed when it is safe to do so. If a cop stops you, explain the situation, and you're unlikely to get a ticket, unless he's a complete ass. (I've driven some cars that the sensors didn't seem to notice, believe it or not.)
Pedestrian? As the pedestrian, you look both ways, and proceed with caution, or you die. Depending on tech to tell you that it's safe to cross the road is a sure way to die. As a driver, pedestrians always have the right of way, so you stop, no debate.
(Score: 1) by anubi on Monday March 06 2017, @06:53AM
No truer words ever said.
The one that gets me, both as driver and pedestrian, is that if a pedestrian *has* tripped the light, the light should keep the red on for a couple of seconds longer while gating the pedestrian first... that way the pedestrian is in the road - and in plain view - before the motorists are gated on. Telling them both to enter the intersection simultaneously leads to deadly surprises. There are often light poles, switch boxes, and other obstructions at intersections which conceal a pedestrian, and the motorist turning right often gets a surprise encounter with a pedestrian that wasn't there a second ago.
As a driver, I pay special attention during right turns if those pedestrian signals are blinking, as that usually indicates active pedestrian activity. I do not believe those things should be automatic, as I do not want it to become routine and a "wolf call and no wolf" kind of thing. A blinking one should mean that someone actively tripped it and is presently in the intersection. Not "might be".... "IS".
In the event of more intelligent camera supervised intersections, use the camera to verify pedestrians are cleared before telling the cars all is OK.
So many people just aren't paying attention anymore either while driving, or walking!
I have had a lot more close calls with humans than cats... Haven't nailed any yet, but I have had several too close for comfort kinda things. None were anybody's real fault - rather we both thought things were clear and made simultaneous decisions.
Honestly, most cats pay more attention before crossing the road.
"Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." [KJV: I Thessalonians 5:21]
(Score: 2) by VLM on Monday March 06 2017, @01:04PM (1 child)
Depending on tech to tell you that it's safe to cross the road is a sure way to die.
The right tech is grade separation, its very difficult to get run over when crossing the street between the parking structure and the mini-skyscraper at my employer because there's a nice skywalk connecting floor 3 of both buildings. The local hospital has the same strategy. It does make things weird for the business because people are wandering in on the 3rd floor or ground floor or who knows what.
I suspect every American skywalk it within 500 miles of the Canadian border. Maybe the tornados and hurricanes down south make it too dangerous, I donno. You'd think being out of the sun would be strongly appealing. Its definitely a nordic ancestry far northern tier thing.
Tunnels are a college campus thing. West of the mississippi we get too much rain, many feet per year, so drainage would be an issue, unless the tunnel is literally only 5 feet between adjacent buildings or one street width apart.
(Score: 2) by Joe Desertrat on Tuesday March 07 2017, @10:04AM
I suspect every American skywalk it within 500 miles of the Canadian border.
Daytona Beach, FL has several with more on the way. That said, unless you want to go out of your way to cross at one, you have to cross streets infested with tourist traffic. I find that, at least in the beachside area, it is easier and safer to cross in the middle of blocks rather than at intersections, even (or especially) if there are traffic lights. You only have vehicles coming at you from two directions to watch out for as opposed to at least four directions at intersections.
(Score: 1) by DavePolaschek on Monday March 06 2017, @05:37PM
The sensor at the red light nearest my house does not sense motorcycles or Smart cars unless they're perfectly placed (I ponder going to mark the intersection with white paint some evening, but that would be unlawful). Luckily, MN has a law which allows you to proceed through the light after waiting long enough for it to have run through a complete cycle (though the light won't cycle at all if it doesn't detect you - chicken, meet egg).
Or if you're in a hurry, get off, walk over to the pole, and press the button for the crosswalk, which also gets cars and cycles a green light.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 06 2017, @01:14PM (1 child)
Just remember, an angry driver is a safe driver.
--Public service announcement by your local traffic authority
(Score: 2) by bob_super on Monday March 06 2017, @07:24PM
Which is a good concept, given how safe drivers make the ones following them very angry.
Self-generating safety!
At the limit, when people are stuck in a jam, they're both at their angriest and safest!
(Score: 2) by bzipitidoo on Monday March 06 2017, @11:38PM
I wholeheartedly agree it is about time traffic lights got smarter. Past time, really.
I've been counting incidents of useless stops, in which a traffic light stops me or other drivers for nothing. The light cycled because its timer was up or for some other reason, even though there was no traffic on the cross street. I understand they do that in case the sensor didn't detect a waiting car, but it's still annoying. Wanted an idea how badly timed traffic lights really are. And the results of my informal survey is that they're pretty bad. During times of heavier traffic, useless stops are less common and shorter, but they still happen. Late evening though, useless stops are so frequent they near equal the number of justifiably red lights. Among the worst are the lights inexplicably programmed to favor one direction with both a green and a green left turn arrow for as much as a full minute, while the other 3 directions are all red. Have too often waited at such a light, with my fellow drivers also waiting on the other two red directions, while no one came through from the only open direction.
Treating these red lights like stop signs is a sure way to get nailed by a camera or a cop. Cities may be intentionally neglectful, to provoke people to run lights so they can extract more revenue from more violations. Signs announcing that an intersection is "high enforcement" often really mean that the intersection is busy, badly designed, and badly timed, ripe for exploitation by a red light camera.
Yeah, I hit Climate Change deniers with arguments about the wastefulness of badly times traffic lights. Even if Climate Change is not real, what is there not to like about improving our traffic lights? Do they really enjoy sitting at red lights that much?
(Score: 2) by jasassin on Tuesday March 07 2017, @02:25AM
It doesn't like you. I don't like you either. You better watch yourself!
jasassin@gmail.com GPG Key ID: 0xE6462C68A9A3DB5A
(Score: 2) by Nerdfest on Monday March 06 2017, @03:45AM (1 child)
Instead of patterns, the lights should actually do image recognition. Sometimes traffic clumps up just because of one person doing something stupid and breaks the pattern. Instead of working to set patterns, have them actually watch the flow of traffic and adjust.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 06 2017, @03:59AM
have them actually watch the flow of traffic, deduce the patterns in them and adjust.
There... I fixed that for ya... aren't I a swell gall?
(Score: 2) by coolgopher on Monday March 06 2017, @04:53AM
The only winning move is not to play...
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Monday March 06 2017, @05:35AM
Yes, smart traffic lights can be better than dumb ones - but when the system is overloaded with cars, it just doesn't matter how smart you make the lights.
Miami south of downtown, I'm looking at you when I say that.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 06 2017, @01:12PM (1 child)
How many cities we have that struggle with heavy traffic? Thousands, many if which inhabited by several millions of people. That's a lot of economical muscle. To me it would make sense to pool these resources and make the results available to all. The current proprietary model is wastefully eating resources because 1) independent actors are reinventing the wheel around the world and also 2) the results of their efforts are not as widely disseminated.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 06 2017, @11:22PM
That's true, but cronyism will probably continue to win out for the foreseeable future. I would go even further and say that the government and government-funded schools should not even be allowed to use proprietary software. Governments should not be dependent on outsiders like corporations, should encourage independence and freedom in general, and should encourage education (since you can't study and/or modify proprietary software code, it is in opposition to education). Proprietary software also creates massive problems when it's used for punishment purposes (red light cameras, results from software used in courts, etc.) because the general public cannot see the code and should not be expected to just trust the developers and the select few third parties - if any - who are allowed to audit the code.
(Score: 2) by bob_super on Monday March 06 2017, @07:29PM
Someone decided that Americans were too dumb to understand roundabouts, which solve the traffic light problem in most cases, especially in the US where intersections are big enough to put nice ones.
Instead, money has been poured into making lights smarter...
The next step in outsourcing your brain is clearly the autonomous car.