CN115574836A

CN115574836A - Navigation route evaluation method, device, equipment and readable medium

Info

Publication number: CN115574836A
Application number: CN202211043379.5A
Authority: CN
Inventors: 李根明; 孙立野; 王金来
Original assignee: Shenyang Meihang Technology Co ltd
Current assignee: Shenyang Meihang Technology Co ltd
Priority date: 2022-08-29
Filing date: 2022-08-29
Publication date: 2023-01-06

Abstract

The invention discloses a navigation route evaluation method, a navigation route evaluation device, equipment and a readable medium. The method comprises the following steps: for each navigation provider, performing: acquiring at least one navigation route of a current navigation provider; comparing each navigation route with a reference route to obtain a comparison result of the navigation route and the reference route; determining at least one route evaluation result of each navigation provider according to the comparison result of at least one navigation route; and determining the navigation evaluation result of each navigation provider according to at least one route evaluation result of each navigation provider. The scheme provided by the invention can evaluate the navigation route planned by the navigation provider, so that the route calculation capability of each navigation provider can be analyzed and evaluated in a real and objective way, and the user can be helped to select better.

Description

Navigation route evaluation method, device, equipment and readable medium

Technical Field

The invention relates to the technical field of data processing, in particular to a navigation route evaluation method, a navigation route evaluation device, navigation route evaluation equipment and a readable medium.

Background

Navigation services are the most frequently used services by users when the route to a destination is unclear. In the navigation service, different navigation providers calculate a navigation route according to the starting position and the end position through respective navigation algorithms and provide the navigation route for a user, and the user goes to a route end point according to the guidance of the navigation route.

Currently, a user typically selects one of several navigation providers to navigate through a navigation route provided by the navigation provider's proprietary algorithm.

Due to the fact that navigation route algorithms of different navigation providers are different and a means for evaluating the navigation route algorithms is lacked at present, when a user selects a navigation provider, the user cannot select a proper navigation provider according to the advantages and disadvantages among the navigation route algorithms.

Disclosure of Invention

The invention provides a navigation route evaluation method, a navigation route evaluation device, navigation route evaluation equipment and a readable medium, which are used for evaluating a navigation provider by a navigation route algorithm.

According to an aspect of the present invention, there is provided a navigation route evaluation method including:

for each navigation provider, performing:

acquiring at least one navigation route of a current navigation provider;

comparing each navigation route with a reference route to obtain a comparison result of the navigation route and the reference route;

determining at least one route evaluation result of each navigation provider according to the comparison result of at least one navigation route;

and determining the navigation evaluation result of each navigation provider according to at least one route evaluation result of each navigation provider.

Optionally, the determining at least one route evaluation result of each navigation provider according to the comparison result of at least one navigation route includes:

for each of the navigation providers, performing:

determining at least one route evaluation factor of the navigation provider and a first weight value corresponding to each route evaluation factor;

determining at least one route evaluation range included by each route evaluation factor and a second weight value corresponding to each route evaluation range;

for each route evaluation range, determining a target navigation route meeting the comparison requirement according to the comparison result, and determining a first navigation score of each evaluation range according to the number of the target navigation routes;

and obtaining one of the route evaluation results of the current navigation provider according to the first navigation score, the first weight value and the second weight value corresponding to each route evaluation factor.

Optionally, the method further includes:

selecting a first standard route from preset standard routes, and taking the first standard route as a reference route;

and calling the current navigation provider to plan a route according to the starting point and the end point of the reference route to obtain the navigation route corresponding to the reference route.

Optionally, each of the reference routes includes at least one track point, and correspondingly, the comparing of each of the navigation routes with the reference route to obtain a comparison result between the navigation route and the reference route includes:

for each of the navigation routes, performing:

determining a first track point included in the reference route;

determining at least one second track point included in the current navigation route;

and determining a comparison result of the current navigation route and the reference route according to the similarity of the first track point and the second track point.

Optionally, the determining at least one route evaluation result of each navigation provider according to the comparison result of at least one navigation route; the method comprises the following steps:

for each of the navigation providers, performing:

determining a target navigation route of at least one similarity interval according to the comparison result;

determining a second navigation score according to the number of the target navigation routes;

and obtaining one of the route evaluation results of the current navigation provider according to the second navigation score.

Optionally, the comparing each navigation route with a reference route to obtain a comparison result between the navigation route and the reference route includes:

for each of the navigation routes, performing:

determining a third track point of the current navigation route and a fourth track point of the reference route, wherein the reference route is obtained by other navigation providers according to the starting point and the end point of the current navigation route;

and determining a comparison result between the current navigation route and each reference route according to the similarity of the third track point and the fourth track point.

Optionally, the determining at least one route evaluation result of each navigation provider according to the comparison result includes:

for each of the navigation providers, performing:

determining a target navigation route with the similarity larger than a preset threshold according to the comparison result;

for each target navigation route, determining a time difference value between a first time duration of the target navigation route and a second time duration of the actual driving route;

and determining a time score of each time range according to the time difference, and obtaining one of route evaluation results of the current navigation provider according to each time score.

Optionally, the determining a navigation evaluation result of each navigation provider according to at least one route evaluation result of each navigation provider includes:

determining a fifth weight value for each of the route evaluation results;

and determining the navigation evaluation result of each navigation provider according to the route evaluation result of each navigation provider and the fifth weight value of each route evaluation result.

According to another aspect of the present invention, there is provided a navigation route evaluation device including:

the navigation route acquiring unit is used for acquiring at least one navigation route of a current navigation provider;

the comparison result determining unit is used for comparing each navigation route with a reference route to obtain a comparison result of the navigation route and the reference route;

a route evaluation result determination unit that determines at least one route evaluation result of each navigation provider based on the comparison result of at least one of the navigation routes;

and the navigation evaluation result determining unit is used for determining the navigation evaluation result of each navigation provider according to at least one route evaluation result of each navigation provider.

According to another aspect of the present invention, there is provided an electronic apparatus including:

at least one processor; and

a memory communicatively coupled to the at least one processor; wherein the content of the first and second substances,

the memory stores a computer program executable by the at least one processor, the computer program being executable by the at least one processor to enable the at least one processor to perform a navigation route evaluation method according to any embodiment of the invention.

According to another aspect of the present invention, there is provided a computer-readable storage medium storing computer instructions for causing a processor to implement the navigation route evaluation method according to any one of the embodiments of the present invention when executed.

According to the technical scheme of the embodiment of the invention, a plurality of navigation routes of each navigation provider are obtained, the navigation routes are compared with the reference route, the comparison result of each navigation route and the reference route is respectively obtained, at least one evaluation result of the navigation provider is obtained according to the respective comparison result of the plurality of navigation routes of each navigation provider, and the navigation evaluation result of the navigation provider is determined according to the at least one evaluation result. The scheme provided by the invention can evaluate the navigation route planned by the navigation provider, so that the route calculation capability of each navigation provider can be analyzed and evaluated in a real and objective way, and the user can be helped to select better.

It should be understood that the statements in this section do not necessarily identify key or critical features of the embodiments of the present invention, nor do they necessarily limit the scope of the invention. Other features of the present invention will become apparent from the following description.

Drawings

In order to more clearly illustrate the technical solutions in the embodiments of the present invention, the drawings needed to be used in the description of the embodiments will be briefly introduced below, and it is obvious that the drawings in the following description are only some embodiments of the present invention, and it is obvious for those skilled in the art to obtain other drawings based on these drawings without creative efforts.

Fig. 1 is a flowchart of a navigation route evaluation method according to an embodiment of the present invention;

fig. 2 is a flowchart of a route evaluation result determination method according to a second embodiment of the present invention;

FIG. 3 is a comparative bar graph of a second embodiment of the present invention;

fig. 4 is a schematic structural diagram of a navigation route evaluation device according to a third embodiment of the present invention;

fig. 5 is a schematic structural diagram of an electronic device implementing the navigation route evaluation method according to the embodiment of the present invention.

Detailed Description

In order to make the technical solutions of the present invention better understood, the technical solutions in the embodiments of the present invention will be clearly and completely described below with reference to the drawings in the embodiments of the present invention, and it is obvious that the described embodiments are only a part of the embodiments of the present invention, and not all of the embodiments. All other embodiments, which can be derived by a person skilled in the art from the embodiments given herein without making any creative effort, shall fall within the protection scope of the present invention.

It should be noted that the terms "first," "second," and the like in the description and claims of the present invention and in the drawings described above are used for distinguishing between similar elements and not necessarily for describing a particular sequential or chronological order. It is to be understood that the data so used is interchangeable under appropriate circumstances such that the embodiments of the invention described herein are capable of operation in other sequences than those illustrated or described herein. Furthermore, the terms "comprises," "comprising," and "having," and any variations thereof, are intended to cover a non-exclusive inclusion, such that a process, method, system, article, or apparatus that comprises a list of steps or elements is not necessarily limited to those steps or elements expressly listed, but may include other steps or elements not expressly listed or inherent to such process, method, article, or apparatus.

Example one

Fig. 1 is a flowchart of a navigation route evaluation method according to an embodiment of the present invention, where the present embodiment is applicable to a case where the navigation routing capability of multiple navigation providers is evaluated, and the method may be executed by a navigation route evaluation device, where the navigation route evaluation device may be implemented in a form of hardware and/or software, and the navigation route evaluation device may be configured in a computer. As shown in fig. 1, for each navigation provider, the following steps are performed:

and S110, acquiring at least one navigation route of the current navigation provider.

The navigation provider refers to a service provider providing services such as navigation route planning and the like through a specific algorithm and map data, and the navigation route refers to a route planning result obtained by calculating by taking the current position as the starting position and combining factors such as map data, an intelligent algorithm and real-time road conditions after each navigation provider obtains the starting position and the end position or obtains the end position. Navigation algorithms of different navigation providers are different, for example, for navigation route planning of the same starting position and end position, the priority of the route with the shortest travel distance is considered to be higher by the navigation provider A, and although more traffic lights exist in the shortest route, the time of the journey may be influenced; the B navigation provider considers the priority of bypassing the traffic light to be high, although this would result in an increase in the distance traveled. Under the difference of processing modes of various influence factors influencing the navigation route, the navigation routes generated by different navigation providers for the same starting position and ending position may have difference, and the evaluation of the navigation routes can determine which navigation provider provides the navigation route with higher quality.

S120, comparing each navigation route with a reference route to obtain a comparison result of the navigation route and the reference route.

And the reference route is compared with each corresponding navigation route, and a reference object of the navigation route comparison result is determined. The generation of the reference route can be divided into at least the following two cases:

the first condition is as follows: and generating reference routes corresponding to different attributes according to preset rules.

And a second condition: and regarding the same starting position and the same end position, the navigation route planned by other navigation providers except the current navigation provider is used as the reference route of the current navigation provider.

In the first case, the reference route is an actual travel track uploaded by the user, track points actually traveled by the user are collected through big data, and the track points are uploaded from a terminal held by the client to obtain the reference route. It should be noted that, in the embodiments of the present invention, the collection process of the data complies with the relevant regulations. The following situations need to be considered when uploading the reference route:

1. the number of trace points included in the reference route needs to be greater than a preset threshold: the preset number of values is determined according to the intervals of the track points, for example, when one track point is marked every 10 meters, a higher threshold value is set; when a 30 meter mark is made, a smaller threshold should be set. When the track point is not greater than the threshold, it indicates that the current reference route has a short route, and does not conform to the driving and walking habit (for example, navigation is not initiated when the route is short, and then the reference route does not have a corresponding navigation route), and the current reference route cannot be used as a reference standard of the navigation route.

2. Determining whether to splice the track points: the user may cause discontinuity of the track point in the midway when uploading the track point due to other conditions, for example, when the user temporarily arrives at a roadside convenience store for purchasing commodities halfway, the user parks and stops the vehicle in the purchasing process, or when the user parks and stops the vehicle due to roadside flameout and the like due to people waiting, call receiving and the like, the track point is interrupted, and finally two sections of tracks are uploaded, and because the duration of the temporary flameout and parking condition is usually short, when the time interval between flameout and ignition is less than the preset time, the two sections of tracks are spliced to obtain the reference route.

3. And (3) filtering out the condition that a certain section of track in the middle is missing: in the case where a certain section of track is missing from the starting point position to the ending point position due to network fluctuation or the like during the route, the actual travel track of the route cannot be determined and information such as travel time cannot be determined from the actual travel track, and therefore the route cannot be used as a reference route.

4. Filtering out the situation that the user bypasses in the journey: for example, in a trip of the user to return home from work, a situation that the user deviates significantly from a preset route from the company to home, such as going around to a shopping mall, going to school to pick up children, etc., may result in a time of the trip from the company to home being significantly longer than a time of the trip from the company to home in a normal situation, and thus the trip has no reference function and cannot be used as a reference route.

In the second case, after one of the navigation providers generates the navigation route according to the starting position and the ending position, the other navigation providers other than the navigation provider may be called to generate the navigation route according to the starting position and the ending position of the navigation route, and the navigation routes are used as the reference route. Because the navigation algorithms of different navigation providers have differences in aspects such as the like, the navigation routes of different navigation providers can be compared pairwise in the mode.

The comparison result between the navigation route and the reference route can be determined by the similarity between the navigation route and the reference route, such as the similarity between the travel route and the travel time, and various comparison results may be obtained according to different comparison modes and selection methods of the reference route.

S130, determining at least one route evaluation result of each navigation provider according to the comparison result of at least one navigation route.

And S140, determining the navigation evaluation result of each navigation provider according to at least one route evaluation result of each navigation provider.

Each navigation provider corresponds to a plurality of navigation routes, each navigation route is compared with the corresponding reference route to obtain a comparison result, and therefore the route calculation capability of one navigation provider can be embodied according to the comparison results of the plurality of navigation routes. Since there may be a variety of comparison results, there may also be a variety of route evaluation results for each navigation provider. And comprehensively determining the navigation evaluation result of each navigation provider according to the route evaluation result.

According to the technical scheme, a plurality of navigation routes of each navigation provider are obtained, the navigation routes are compared with the reference route, the comparison result of each navigation route and the reference route is obtained respectively, at least one evaluation result of the navigation provider is obtained according to the comparison result corresponding to each of the plurality of navigation routes of each navigation provider, and the navigation evaluation result of the navigation provider is determined according to the at least one evaluation result. The scheme provided by the invention can evaluate the navigation route planned by the navigation provider, so that the route calculation capability of each navigation provider can be analyzed and evaluated in a real and objective angle, and the user can be helped to select better.

Example two

Fig. 2 is a flowchart of a route evaluation result determination method according to a second embodiment of the present invention.

As shown in fig. 2, for each navigation provider, the following steps are performed:

s210, determining at least one route evaluation factor of the navigation provider and a first weight value corresponding to each route evaluation factor.

As described in the foregoing embodiment, in the first case, when comparing different reference routes generated according to the preset rule and corresponding to different attributes with the navigation route, it is necessary to add an influence factor that may influence the route calculation, including:

1. and acquiring traffic information when the reference route is generated, and assigning a traffic condition to each road in the reference route.

2. And acquiring the restriction information when the reference route is generated, and assigning the restriction condition of each road at the moment.

3. And acquiring weather information when the reference route is generated, and adding weather information for each area according to the area of the reference route.

The evaluation factors refer to evaluation items of route evaluation results under different dimensions, and for each navigation provider, the evaluation factors correspond to various route evaluation factors and are used for determining a comparison result of the navigation route and the reference route from multiple dimensions. The evaluation factors may include the following:

distance factor: refers to the total mileage distance of the reference route.

Urban factors: refers to the city where the reference route is located.

Congestion factors: refers to congestion of the reference route.

Time factor: refers to the total time of use of the reference route.

For each different factor, different first weight values are respectively given, and the first weight values can reflect the influence degree of different evaluation factors on the reference route, for example, the influence of the city factor on the reference route is usually smaller than that of the distance factor, and the first weight value of the distance factor is larger than that of the city factor.

S220, determining at least one route evaluation range included by each route evaluation factor and a second weight value corresponding to each route evaluation range.

The route evaluation range refers to a range in which the reference route is divided for each route evaluation factor, for example, when the route evaluation factor is a distance factor, the route evaluation range may include: 0-5km, 5-10km, 10-30km, 30-50km, 50-100km, 100-200km, more than 200km and the like; when the route evaluation factor is a congestion factor, the route evaluation range may include: unknown, extremely unblocked, slow moving, congested, severely congested and the like. And assigning different first weighted values to each route evaluation range according to the influence degree of each route evaluation range on the navigation route. Taking the distance factor as an example, when the navigation route for the short-distance trip is heavily looked at, a larger second weight value may be given to the route evaluation range with the shorter distance, and the sum of the second weight values of each route evaluation range is 1.

And S230, aiming at each route evaluation range, determining a target navigation route meeting the comparison requirement according to the comparison result, and determining a first navigation score of each evaluation range according to the number of the target navigation routes.

The comparison result may be a similarity condition obtained by calculating similarity through track points reflecting the actual walking tracks of the navigation route and the reference route, and the navigation route and the reference route are classified according to different similarities, such as completely consistent (similarity 90-100%), highly similar (80-89%), moderately similar (65-79%), less similar (less than 65%), and in the case that the similarity is lower than a certain level, because the navigation route and the reference route may be different routes, the comparison result has no reference meaning, and therefore, only the navigation route with the similarity higher than the certain level with the reference route, such as completely consistent and highly similar (similarity greater than 80%), is selected as meeting the comparison requirement. The first navigation score may be determined according to the total number of the navigation routes and the number of the navigation routes meeting the comparison requirement, for example, when the route evaluation factor is a distance factor, the number of the reference routes with a route evaluation range of 0-5km is 10000, and the number of the navigation routes with a navigation provider a meeting the comparison requirement is 8000, and the first navigation score with a route evaluation range of 0-5km is 0.8.

S240, obtaining one of the route evaluation results of the current navigation provider according to the first navigation score, the first weight value and the second weight value corresponding to each route evaluation factor.

And for the current navigation provider, after the first navigation score of each route evaluation range is obtained, carrying out weighted summation according to the second weight value of each route evaluation range to obtain the score corresponding to the route evaluation range.

Taking distance factors as an example, the route evaluation ranges are 0-5km, 5-10km, 10-20km and more than 20km, the first navigation score of each route evaluation range is 0.8, 0.6, 0.5 and 0.4 respectively, the second weighting value of each route evaluation range is 0.3, 0.2 and 0.2, and the scores of the distance factors are obtained by weighted summation as follows:

0.8*0.3+0.6*0.3+0.5*0.2+0.8*0.2＝0.68。

taking the time factor as an example, the route evaluation ranges are 0-5min, 5-10min, 10-20min and more than 20min, the first navigation scores of each route evaluation range are respectively 0.7, 0.5, 0.6 and 0.5, the second weighted values of each route evaluation range are respectively 0.2, 0.3 and 0.3, and the scores of the time factor are obtained by weighted summation as follows:

0.7*0.2+0.5*0.2+0.6*0.3+0.5*0.3＝0.57。

taking congestion factors as an example, according to the difference of congestion situations, the route evaluation range is determined to be extremely smooth, slow running, congested and heavily congested, for each navigation route, distances belonging to the route evaluation range are respectively determined, for example, for a total number of N navigation routes provided by the navigation provider a, where the length of the navigation route N1 is 10km, where 1km belongs to extremely smooth, 2km belongs to smooth, 3km belongs to slow running, 2km belongs to congested and 2km belongs to heavily congested, the second weighted value of each route evaluation range is 0.3, 0.2 and 0.1, and the score of the navigation route N1 is obtained by weighted summation of each route evaluation range and its corresponding distance value as follows:

N1＝(1*0.3+2*0.2+3*0.2+2*0.2+2*0.1)/10＝-0.19。

the grade of the navigation route provided by the navigation provider A in the dimension of the congestion factor is as follows:

congestion factor dimension (a) = (N1 + N2+ \8230; + Nn)/Nn

After the scores of all the navigation routes of the navigation provider A are calculated, the scores of all the navigation routes are added and divided by the number of the navigation routes to obtain the score of the congestion factor of the navigation provider A.

Taking city factors as examples, the route evaluation ranges are a direct prefecture city, a provincial meeting, a prefecture city, a county level city and a township, the first navigation scores of each route evaluation range are respectively 0.7, 0.6, 0.5 and 0.8, the second weighted values of each route evaluation range are respectively 0.3, 0.2 and 0.2, and the scores of the city factors are obtained through weighted summation as follows:

0.7*0.3+0.6*0.3+0.5*0.2+0.8*0.2＝0.65。

since different route evaluation factors have different first weight values, after the score of each route evaluation factor is obtained, the route evaluation result of the current navigation provider needs to be obtained by performing weighted summation again through the first weight values, that is, the route evaluation result = the score of the factor a + the score of the factor B + the first weight value of the factor B +. + -. The score of the factor N + the first weight value of the factor N. Taking the evaluation factors in the above example as an example, the first weight values of the distance factor, the time factor, the congestion factor and the city factor are 0.3, 0.2, 0.3 and 0.2 respectively, the scores are 0.68, 0.57, 0.66 and 0.65 respectively, and the route evaluation result obtained by weighted summation is 0.68 + 0.3+0.57 + 0.2+0.66 + 0.3+0.65 + 0.2=0.646.

In the second embodiment of the present invention, the method further includes:

In the first embodiment, when the reference route is selected, a first standard route is selected from pre-created standard routes, multiple navigation providers are called to calculate routes according to the start position and the end position of the first standard route, so as to obtain a corresponding navigation route, and then subsequent processing is performed according to a comparison result between the navigation route and the first standard route serving as the reference route.

By creating the standard route in advance, the navigation routes of different navigation providers can be compared with the actual track of the user conveniently, so that the navigation providers can be seen easily, the route quality of the navigation providers is better and more accurate, and the functions of editing, checking and the like can be realized in the management platform.

In the second embodiment of the present invention, the at least one route evaluation result of each navigation provider is determined according to the comparison result of at least one navigation route; the method comprises the following steps:

for each of the navigation providers, performing:

and obtaining one of route evaluation results of the current navigation provider according to the second navigation score.

In the second embodiment, for the same start position and the same end position, the navigation route planned by other navigation providers other than the current navigation provider is used as the reference route of the current navigation provider, the similarity between the track points of the navigation route and the reference route is used as a comparison result, a plurality of similarity intervals are divided according to the comparison result, different scores are given to each similarity interval, and the second navigation score is determined according to the number of target navigation routes belonging to each similarity interval. For example, as shown in table 1 below, the navigation providers a, B, and C perform pairwise comparison, and the similarity intervals are divided into more than 80%, 65% -79%, and less than 65%, which are excellent for more than 80% of routes, count 1 point, count 0.5 point for 65% -79% of routes, and count no point for less than 65% of routes; 8216 navigation routes are provided by the navigation providers A, B and C, after the navigation provider A is compared with the navigation provider B, the number of the routes belonging to the optimal route is 5332, the number of the routes belonging to the good route is 2156, after the navigation provider A is compared with the navigation provider C, the number of the routes belonging to the optimal route is 3321, and the number of the routes belonging to the good route is 3298, so that the second navigation score of the navigation provider A is that the number of the routes belonging to the optimal route after the comparison with the navigation providers B and C is multiplied by 1 and added with the number of the routes belonging to the good route multiplied by 0.5, and then the sum of the routes belonging to the navigation providers is divided by twice 8216 (compared with the navigation providers B and C), namely: (5332 × 1+2156 0.5+3321 + 1+3298 × 0.5)/8216/2 =70%.

By analogy, the second navigation score for navigation provider B is:

(5332*1+2156*0.5+4459*1+2101*0.5)/8216/2＝73％；

the second navigation score for navigation provider B is:

(3321*1+3298*0.5+4459*1+2101*0.5)/8216/2＝64％。

	A-B	A-C	B-C
				superior food	5332	3321	4459
Good wine	2156	3298	2101
				Difference between	728	1597	1656
Total up to	8216	8216	8216

TABLE 1

In the second embodiment of the present invention, the comparing each of the navigation routes with a reference route to obtain a comparison result between the navigation route and the reference route includes:

for each of the navigation routes, performing:

When the situation two described in the above embodiment one is met, for example, when a standard route is not created and no actual user upload trajectory is available, routes between different navigation providers need to be compared pairwise, so as to mutually serve as a navigation route and a reference route. Because there is no standard route, the navigation providers cannot be called to plan the route according to the starting position and the ending position of the standard route, so the starting position and the ending position need to be randomly selected, each navigation provider generates a navigation route according to the random starting position and the random ending position, and each navigation route is compared pairwise to obtain a comparison result. Reference may be made to the above detailed description of the way the score is calculated for case two, depending on the comparison results.

When the marked routes serving as comparison objects are not compared, the navigation routes are compared with each other among different navigation providers, and the comparison result is reflected through data, so that the difference of route calculation capacity among different navigation providers can be intuitively reflected.

In the second embodiment of the present invention, the determining at least one route evaluation result of each navigation provider according to the comparison result includes:

for each of the navigation providers, performing:

In addition to the two cases in the first embodiment, the route uploaded by the user in real time when the user goes out may be used as the reference route, for example, the user initiates a route calculation event through a vehicle machine of the vehicle when the user goes out and goes to work in the morning, the starting position of the route calculation event is determined as a home, the end position of the route calculation event is determined as a company, each navigation provider calculates the route according to the home position and the company position, and the user normally goes to the company. When a user arrives at a company, a route calculation event is finished, a route track which the user drives is uploaded, and the actual time (namely, the second time) from home to the company is determined, the estimated time (namely, the first time) of a target navigation route which is obtained by each navigation provider according to the route calculation is compared with the actual time, the more time is needed when the estimated time is used than when the actual time is used, the lower time score is, and a route evaluation result is obtained through summarizing according to a plurality of time scores of the navigation providers.

Further, when determining the actual usage of the user, the following needs to be considered:

1. the waiting time for starting and stopping is eliminated, for example, the time for idling the hot vehicle to not walk is not counted into the actual time.

2. The situations that the user waits for a long time, such as midway parking, temporary parking and the like, are eliminated. The midway parking can be determined according to the road section uniform speed and the congestion time in the traffic information.

3. The time generated by the conditions of finding the parking space and the like is not counted into the actual time, and whether the parking space is found in the parking lot can be determined according to the positioning of the user.

After the actual driving route of the user is obtained, the track of the actual driving route uploaded by the vehicle machine is compared with the track of the navigation route of each navigation provider, and the route with the similarity within a certain preset threshold range is selected for comparing the actual time consumption with the estimated time.

And determining an error tolerance value in each time range according to the preset running time range, wherein the shorter the actual time is, the smaller the error tolerance value is. Determining the number of target navigation routes of each navigation provider, determining whether the difference value between the estimated time and the actual time of the target navigation routes exceeds the error tolerance value corresponding to the time range, and counting the number of the target navigation routes of each navigation provider, wherein the estimated time of each navigation provider in each time range does not exceed the sum of the actual time and the error tolerance value, so as to obtain the route evaluation result of each navigation provider.

In a possible embodiment, different driving time ranges are divided according to actual driving time periods, for example, 0-5 minutes, 5-10 minutes, 10-30 minutes, 30 minutes-1 hour, 1-2 hours, 2-4 hours, 4-8 hours and 8 hours or more, and the error tolerance values of the different driving time ranges are 1 minute, 2 minutes, 4 minutes, 6 minutes, 12 minutes, 15 minutes, 30 minutes and 30 minutes respectively because the error tolerance values increase with the increase of the time ranges, and the difference between the estimated time and the actual time of the navigation route calculated by each navigation provider is within the error tolerance values, which can be regarded as excellent routes, and the route evaluation results are determined by the number of the excellent routes respectively.

For example, as shown in table 2 below, 13940 routes are uploaded by each of the navigation providers a, B, C, and D, wherein the number of routes, which are within the error tolerance value of the difference between the estimated time and the actual time, is 731 in 1589 routes of 0-5 minutes, taking the navigation route provider a as an example; the number of the paths with the difference value between the estimated time and the actual time within the error tolerance value in 4171 paths of 5-10 minutes is 2842; the number of routes, the difference value of estimated time and actual time is within an error tolerance value, of 7239 routes in 10-30 minutes is 5874; the number of the routes, the difference between the estimated time and the actual time of use of which is within the error tolerance value, of 932 routes of 30 minutes to 1 hour is 722; the number of routes having a difference between estimated time and actual time within the error tolerance value among 9 routes of 1-2 hours is 5, so that the total number of routes having a difference between estimated time and actual time within the error tolerance value for navigation provider a is 10174, and a score of 72.98 is obtained in comparison with total 13940, and navigation providers B, C and D are the same.

Total number (strip)	13940
						User time interval	Number of	Navigation provider A	Navigation provider B	Navigation provider C	Navigation provider D
0-5min	1589	731	896	874	903
						5-10 minutes	4171	2842	2988	3164	2983
10-30 minutes	7239	5874	5418	6034	5554
						30 minutes to 1 hour	932	722	662	687	625
1 hour to 2 hours	9	5	6	4	4
						2 hours to 4 hours	0	0	0	0	0
4 hours to 8 hours	0	0	0	0	0
						Over 8 hours	0	0	0	0	0
Is totaled	13940	10174	9970	10763	10069
						Scoring		72.98	71.52	77.21	72.23

TABLE 2

As shown in table 2 above, the route evaluation result of the navigation provider a is 72.98, which is larger than 71.52 of the navigation provider B, but within the time range of 0-5 minutes, the number of navigation routes within the error tolerance range of the estimated time and the actual time of the navigation provider B is rather larger, which indicates that the calculated route quality of the navigation provider B for a short trip is higher, and therefore, the user can give priority to calculating the route by the navigation provider B for a short trip.

In addition, a comparison graph can be generated according to each time range, the difference value between the estimated time and the actual time of the route calculation of each navigation provider is displayed through the comparison graph, for example, two comparison histograms are generated for each time range, one is used for representing the number of routes with the estimated time being less than the actual time, the other is used for representing the number of routes with the estimated time being more than the actual time, and whether the route planning of the navigation provider is higher or lower than the actual time of the user in the whole can be determined according to the height of the histograms, so that whether the route calculation of the navigation provider is faster or slower can be determined.

For example, fig. 3 is a comparison histogram applied to the second embodiment of the present invention, and the histogram is established according to each time interval and the number of routes whose estimated time is less than the actual time, where in each time interval, the left histogram represents the number of routes that are shorter than the actual time of the user, and the right histogram represents the number of routes that are longer than the actual time of the user. Fig. 3 may be a comparison histogram of the navigation provider a, as shown in fig. 3, in the intervals of 0-5 minutes, 5-10 minutes, and 10-30 minutes, the number of routes of the navigation provider a that are longer than the actual time of the user is significantly larger than the number of routes that are shorter than the actual time of the user, which indicates that the route calculation result of the navigation provider a is slow overall.

In the second embodiment of the present invention, the determining the navigation evaluation result of each navigation provider according to at least one route evaluation result of each navigation provider includes:

determining a fifth weight value for each of the route evaluation results;

As described above, the route evaluation results obtained in the second embodiment of the present invention are divided into three types: 1. obtaining a route evaluation result according to a preset standard route; 2. obtaining a route evaluation result according to the result of pairwise comparison of each navigation provider; 3. and comparing the route evaluation result with a route calculation event initiated by a user. And respectively endowing a fifth weight value to the three different route evaluation results, and performing weighted summation to obtain a navigation evaluation result of each navigation provider.

Every interval of time, the navigation evaluation results of the navigation providers can be calculated by the method of the second embodiment of the invention, the icons are generated according to the navigation evaluation results and the corresponding time, and if the navigation evaluation results of a certain navigation provider change, the navigation evaluation results can be obviously reflected in the chart.

By comparing the route of the actual travel of the user with the navigation routes of all navigation providers, the route calculation result of the navigation route of each navigation provider can be determined to be faster or slower, the navigation routes of all navigation providers in different time intervals can be good or bad, and the evaluation of the route calculation capability of each navigation provider is more objective and more suitable for actual application scenes.

In conclusion, the scheme of the invention evaluates the route quality of each route through the evaluation method, and can analyze and evaluate the route calculation service quality of each navigation provider from a more real and objective angle. Reflecting the quality of the route from each dimension, and comprehensively evaluating the route quality. Standard support is provided for route quality, and theoretical data support is continuously provided for route quality.

EXAMPLE III

Fig. 4 is a schematic structural diagram of a navigation route evaluation device according to a third embodiment of the present invention.

As shown in fig. 4, the apparatus includes:

a navigation route obtaining unit 410, configured to obtain at least one navigation route of a current navigation provider;

a comparison result determining unit 420, configured to compare each of the navigation routes with a reference route to obtain a comparison result between the navigation route and the reference route;

a route evaluation result determination unit 430 that determines at least one route evaluation result of each navigation provider based on the comparison result of at least one of the navigation routes;

and a navigation evaluation result determining unit 440, configured to determine a navigation evaluation result of each navigation provider according to at least one route evaluation result of each navigation provider.

In the third embodiment of the present invention, the route evaluation result determining unit 430 is configured to, for each navigation provider, perform:

In the third embodiment of the present invention, the navigation route obtaining unit 410 is configured to select a first standard route from preset standard routes, and use the first standard route as a reference route;

In the third embodiment of the present invention, each of the reference routes includes at least one track point, and correspondingly, the comparison result determining unit 420 is configured to, for each of the navigation routes, perform:

determining a first track point included in the reference route;

In the third embodiment of the present invention, the comparison result determining unit 420 is configured to, for each of the navigation routes, perform:

In a third embodiment of the present invention, the navigation evaluation result determining unit is configured to execute:

determining a fifth weight value for each of the route evaluation results;

The navigation route evaluation device provided by the embodiment of the invention can execute the navigation route evaluation method provided by any embodiment of the invention, and has corresponding functional modules and beneficial effects of the execution method.

Example four

FIG. 5 illustrates a schematic diagram of an electronic device 10 that may be used to implement an embodiment of the invention. Electronic devices are intended to represent various forms of digital computers, such as laptops, desktops, workstations, personal digital assistants, servers, blade servers, mainframes, and other appropriate computers. The electronic device may also represent various forms of mobile devices, such as personal digital assistants, cellular phones, smart phones, wearable devices (e.g., helmets, glasses, watches, etc.), and other similar computing devices. The components shown herein, their connections and relationships, and their functions, are meant to be exemplary only, and are not meant to limit implementations of the inventions described and/or claimed herein.

As shown in fig. 5, the electronic device 10 includes at least one processor 11, and a memory communicatively connected to the at least one processor 11, such as a Read Only Memory (ROM) 12, a Random Access Memory (RAM) 13, and the like, wherein the memory stores a computer program executable by the at least one processor, and the processor 11 may perform various suitable actions and processes according to the computer program stored in the Read Only Memory (ROM) 12 or the computer program loaded from the storage unit 18 into the Random Access Memory (RAM) 13. In the RAM 13, various programs and data necessary for the operation of the electronic apparatus 10 can also be stored. The processor 11, the ROM 12, and the RAM 13 are connected to each other via a bus 14. An input/output (I/O) interface 15 is also connected to the bus 14.

A number of components in the electronic device 10 are connected to the I/O interface 15, including: an input unit 16 such as a keyboard, a mouse, or the like; an output unit 17 such as various types of displays, speakers, and the like; a storage unit 18 such as a magnetic disk, an optical disk, or the like; and a communication unit 19 such as a network card, modem, wireless communication transceiver, etc. The communication unit 19 allows the electronic device 10 to exchange information/data with other devices via a computer network such as the internet and/or various telecommunication networks.

The processor 11 may be a variety of general and/or special purpose processing components having processing and computing capabilities. Some examples of processor 11 include, but are not limited to, a Central Processing Unit (CPU), a Graphics Processing Unit (GPU), various specialized Artificial Intelligence (AI) computing chips, various processors running machine learning model algorithms, a Digital Signal Processor (DSP), and any suitable processor, controller, microcontroller, or the like. The processor 11 performs the various methods and processes described above, such as the navigation route evaluation method.

In some embodiments, the navigation route evaluation method may be implemented as a computer program that is tangibly embodied on a computer-readable storage medium, such as storage unit 18. In some embodiments, part or all of the computer program may be loaded and/or installed onto the electronic device 10 via the ROM 12 and/or the communication unit 19. When the computer program is loaded into RAM 13 and executed by processor 11, one or more steps of the navigation route evaluation method described above may be performed. Alternatively, in other embodiments, the processor 11 may be configured to perform the navigation route evaluation method in any other suitable manner (e.g., by way of firmware).

Various implementations of the systems and techniques described here above may be implemented in digital electronic circuitry, integrated circuitry, field Programmable Gate Arrays (FPGAs), application Specific Integrated Circuits (ASICs), application Specific Standard Products (ASSPs), system on a chip (SOCs), load programmable logic devices (CPLDs), computer hardware, firmware, software, and/or combinations thereof. These various embodiments may include: implemented in one or more computer programs that are executable and/or interpretable on a programmable system including at least one programmable processor, which may be special or general purpose, receiving data and instructions from, and transmitting data and instructions to, a storage system, at least one input device, and at least one output device.

A computer program for implementing the methods of the present invention may be written in any combination of one or more programming languages. These computer programs may be provided to a processor of a general purpose computer, special purpose computer, or other programmable data processing apparatus, such that the computer programs, when executed by the processor, cause the functions/acts specified in the flowchart and/or block diagram block or blocks to be performed. A computer program can execute entirely on a machine, partly on the machine, as a stand-alone software package, partly on the machine and partly on a remote machine or entirely on the remote machine or server.

In the context of the present invention, a computer-readable storage medium may be a tangible medium that can contain, or store a computer program for use by or in connection with an instruction execution system, apparatus, or device. A computer readable storage medium may include, but is not limited to, an electronic, magnetic, optical, electromagnetic, infrared, or semiconductor system, apparatus, or device, or any suitable combination of the foregoing. Alternatively, the computer readable storage medium may be a machine readable signal medium. More specific examples of a machine-readable storage medium would include an electrical connection based on one or more wires, a portable computer diskette, a hard disk, a Random Access Memory (RAM), a read-only memory (ROM), an erasable programmable read-only memory (EPROM or flash memory), an optical fiber, a compact disc read-only memory (CD-ROM), an optical storage device, a magnetic storage device, or any suitable combination of the foregoing.

To provide for interaction with a user, the systems and techniques described here can be implemented on an electronic device having: a display device (e.g., a CRT (cathode ray tube) or LCD (liquid crystal display) monitor) for displaying information to a user; and a keyboard and a pointing device (e.g., a mouse or a trackball) by which a user can provide input to the electronic device. Other kinds of devices may also be used to provide for interaction with a user; for example, feedback provided to the user can be any form of sensory feedback (e.g., visual feedback, auditory feedback, or tactile feedback); and input from the user may be received in any form, including acoustic, speech, or tactile input.

The systems and techniques described here can be implemented in a computing system that includes a back-end component (e.g., as a data server), or that includes a middleware component (e.g., an application server), or that includes a front-end component (e.g., a user computer having a graphical user interface or a web browser through which a user can interact with an implementation of the systems and techniques described here), or any combination of such back-end, middleware, or front-end components. The components of the system can be interconnected by any form or medium of digital data communication (e.g., a communication network). Examples of communication networks include: local Area Networks (LANs), wide Area Networks (WANs), blockchain networks, and the Internet.

The computing system may include clients and servers. A client and server are generally remote from each other and typically interact through a communication network. The relationship of client and server arises by virtue of computer programs running on the respective computers and having a client-server relationship to each other. The server can be a cloud server, also called a cloud computing server or a cloud host, and is a host product in a cloud computing service system, so that the defects of high management difficulty and weak service expansibility in the traditional physical host and VPS service are overcome.

It should be understood that various forms of the flows shown above may be used, with steps reordered, added, or deleted. For example, the steps described in the present invention may be executed in parallel, sequentially, or in different orders, and are not limited herein as long as the desired results of the technical solution of the present invention can be achieved.

The above-described embodiments should not be construed as limiting the scope of the invention. It should be understood by those skilled in the art that various modifications, combinations, sub-combinations and substitutions may be made in accordance with design requirements and other factors. Any modification, equivalent replacement, and improvement made within the spirit and principle of the present invention should be included in the protection scope of the present invention.

Claims

1. A navigation route evaluation method, comprising:

for each navigation provider, performing:

acquiring at least one navigation route of a current navigation provider;

2. The method of claim 1, wherein determining at least one route rating result for each navigation provider based on the comparison of at least one of the navigation routes comprises:

for each of the navigation providers, performing:

3. The method of claim 1, further comprising:

4. The method according to claim 1, wherein each of the reference routes includes at least one track point, and correspondingly, the comparing each of the navigation routes with the reference route to obtain a comparison result between the navigation route and the reference route includes:

for each of the navigation routes, performing:

determining a first track point included in the reference route;

5. The method of claim 1, wherein the determining at least one route rating for each navigation provider is based on the comparison of at least one of the navigation routes; the method comprises the following steps:

for each of the navigation providers, performing:

6. The method according to claim 1, wherein the comparing each of the navigation routes with a reference route to obtain a comparison result between the navigation route and the reference route comprises:

for each of the navigation routes, performing:

determining a third track point of the current navigation route and a fourth track point of the reference route, wherein the reference route is a navigation route obtained by other navigation providers according to the starting point and the end point of the current navigation route;

7. The method of claim 1, wherein determining at least one route rating for each navigation provider based on the comparison comprises:

for each of the navigation providers, performing:

8. The method of claim 1, wherein determining the navigation rating results for each navigation provider based on at least one route rating result for each navigation provider comprises:

determining a fifth weight value for each of the route evaluation results;

9. A navigation route evaluation device characterized by comprising:

10. An electronic device, characterized in that the electronic device comprises:

at least one processor; and

the memory stores a computer program executable by the at least one processor to enable the at least one processor to perform the navigation route evaluation method of any one of claims 1-8.

11. A computer-readable storage medium storing computer instructions for causing a processor to implement the navigation route evaluation method of any one of claims 1 to 8 when executed.