EP1922702A1 - Procede d'evaluation pour identifier des routes empruntees - Google Patents

Procede d'evaluation pour identifier des routes empruntees

Info

Publication number
EP1922702A1
EP1922702A1 EP06776852A EP06776852A EP1922702A1 EP 1922702 A1 EP1922702 A1 EP 1922702A1 EP 06776852 A EP06776852 A EP 06776852A EP 06776852 A EP06776852 A EP 06776852A EP 1922702 A1 EP1922702 A1 EP 1922702A1
Authority
EP
European Patent Office
Prior art keywords
road
evaluation
data
courses
evaluation method
Prior art date
Legal status (The legal status is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the status listed.)
Withdrawn
Application number
EP06776852A
Other languages
German (de)
English (en)
Inventor
Wolfgang Beier
Current Assignee (The listed assignees may be inaccurate. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation or warranty as to the accuracy of the list.)
Mercedes Benz Group AG
Original Assignee
Daimler AG
Priority date (The priority date is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the date listed.)
Filing date
Publication date
Application filed by Daimler AG filed Critical Daimler AG
Publication of EP1922702A1 publication Critical patent/EP1922702A1/fr
Withdrawn legal-status Critical Current

Links

Classifications

    • G—PHYSICS
    • G01—MEASURING; TESTING
    • G01C—MEASURING DISTANCES, LEVELS OR BEARINGS; SURVEYING; NAVIGATION; GYROSCOPIC INSTRUMENTS; PHOTOGRAMMETRY OR VIDEOGRAMMETRY
    • G01C21/00—Navigation; Navigational instruments not provided for in groups G01C1/00 - G01C19/00
    • G01C21/26—Navigation; Navigational instruments not provided for in groups G01C1/00 - G01C19/00 specially adapted for navigation in a road network
    • G—PHYSICS
    • G07—CHECKING-DEVICES
    • G07B—TICKET-ISSUING APPARATUS; FARE-REGISTERING APPARATUS; FRANKING APPARATUS
    • G07B15/00—Arrangements or apparatus for collecting fares, tolls or entrance fees at one or more control points
    • G07B15/06—Arrangements for road pricing or congestion charging of vehicles or vehicle users, e.g. automatic toll systems

Definitions

  • the invention relates to an evaluation method for recognizing busy roads, which are e.g. are chargeable by vehicle measured values such as Position and direction of travel.
  • the measurements obtained in the vehicle alone may not be sufficient to distinguish a course of the road which is chargeable from another which is not chargeable or otherwise chargeable.
  • so-called support beacons are used, each of which transmits further information to only one of the roads to be distinguished in the vehicle, so that then for the evaluation system, the full information is sufficient to make a decision safely.
  • the object of the invention is therefore to develop a suitable method that largely overcomes the above-mentioned problems.
  • This object is achieved in a method according to the preamble of claim 1 by the characterizing features of claim 1. Further details and advantageous embodiments of the method according to the invention are the subject of the dependent claims.
  • Fig. 1 example of a problematic decision point
  • Fig. 3 shows the necessary and sufficient description for the evaluation of the course of the road
  • a data record is kept available in the memory of the evaluation device, which describes the course of the toll road from the decision point in the direction of travel backwards.
  • the length of this described section must be long enough to cover at least one characteristic of the road actually traveled, which is different from all other competing road courses in the vicinity, determined by measuring sensors. It can not be determined by means of evaluation device in the vehicle, which length of a stored road course sufficient for this specification, since this depends on the respective progressions of all alternative roads. Therefore, it is the responsibility of the person who creates the datasets for the evaluation devices to provide sufficient information about competing road courses beforehand as a dataset.
  • each of these branches also has the condition of the first section near the decision point (clear measurement difference present).
  • the measured variables determined by the existing sensors are compared with data describing the course of possibly tree-like merging possible travel paths to the decision point.
  • the data are preferably in the same form as the measured variables, or in forms of representation from which the measured variables can be derived, since a conversion is largely eliminated.
  • the data provided to the vehicle must be conditioned beforehand to provide the necessary minimum of information that allows the evaluation logic to clearly identify the actual traveled route from consideration of all routes leading to the decision point by comparison with the sensor measurements , For this purpose, the comparisons of the various alternative routes incl. Branches must be carried out so far back to there is no other course which does not lead to the decision point, but which, taking into account the measurement tolerances, could be confused with the relevant course.
  • the comparison between the incoming measured values and the existing data is preferably carried out in such a way that sections of the (toll road) course to be considered that are confusingly close (ie within the tolerances of the sensor values) to competing progressions are considered less or not at all and, on the other hand primarily the sections that deviate so far from competing courses that they are clearly distinguishable taking into account the measurement tolerance.
  • a weighting of the data can take place in the sense that a gradation of the relevance of the data in relation to existing (possibly vehicle-dependent) measurement tolerance and thus uniqueness of the differentiation and thus the distinctness of the alternative routes is made.
  • FIG. 1 shows an example of a problematic situation.
  • the decision point on the chargeable segment a can be reached via the leads g, d-e or c-e.
  • An alternative trip over the segments c-f-b leads very close to the decision point.
  • a clear decision is now to be made about driving on the segment a.
  • the course of the road from the decision point in the direction of travel must be described in reverse and present in the data set of the evaluation device until it differs from the competing road b to such an extent that it is no longer confused by the acquired measured values despite existing tolerances can. From this example it becomes obvious that the description of the course a is not sufficient. If only the course a is known for an evaluation and the vehicle actually travels the path cfb, then the tolerances of the measurement results would not be sufficient to make a clear decision. This shows that here the description of the course of the toll road must take place here against the direction of travel over at least one branch.
  • the branches must be described so far that taking into account the tolerances of the described branch and the rest of the way to the decision point can not be confused with another road course (clear difference of the measured values).
  • the branch e in addition to distance a, the branch e must also be described and present as a data set in the evaluation unit. Assuming that the tolerances of the sensor data for direction determination in the considered case are sufficiently precise, the entry via e on the toll road a can be clearly distinguished from the route cfb. The left / right curve then clearly differs in the measured values from the right / left curve of the competing road.
  • the record carried in the evaluation unit should be as small as possible in order to reduce storage and transmission costs.
  • the dataset must describe the course of the road up to the points where the competing courses are so different that they can be reliably separated by measurement.
  • the measured values from these sections thus hardly contribute to the decision-making process. From this one can follow that thus also the exact knowledge of the course of the relevant road section at these places is not necessary. So you can avoid the description of these places and look at other parameters or
  • FIG. 3 shows, by way of example, a minimally necessary description of the decision point considered.
  • the exact lengths of the sections and possibly also the sections themselves are determined by the type and tolerances of the sensors used in the vehicle.
  • the specification of the details and the extent to which each segment is described in the accompanying data record must be made accordingly in a center responsible for the quality of the decisions. For this reason, an accuracy limit must be known in this control center both for determining the position and for determining the direction, which obtains all available sensors with a probability that corresponds to the permitted error rate.
  • the correct (minimum) detail quantity of descriptive data for the evaluation process is then available for the evaluation device.
  • the distance of the competing travel paths or directions must be more than twice the agreed accuracy. This corresponds to the considered example case a record in which the sections described in Figure 3 are present.
  • the algorithm used in the evaluation unit must detect the driving of the complete course of the relevant road, ie from the beginning of a "branch" to the (common to all branches) decision point
  • a middle course over the entire course is not sufficient for longer distances either to evaluate each measured value separately, eg whether it is within the agreed tolerance, or to evaluate 'packages' of measured values together over short distances, eg with a 'least square' tray, in order to mitigate individual 'outliers'.
  • the central service point which describes the course of the road, taking into account the measuring tolerances of the evaluation devices, for the compilation of the data set must, in addition to the Precise agreements of measurement tolerances specify the exact format used to transmit this data to the processing unit.
  • This format should be the same for all recognition sites, even though, because of the wide variety of adjacent road conditions, the structures for these minimal data sets are always different.
  • the format of the data set should be selected so that the same algorithm or software can always be used for the evaluation in the evaluation unit.
  • the expected diversity of the structures of minimally to be described road courses can be represented in a recursive structure of "courses" which branch off optionally and then form courses again.
  • Figure 4 shows by way of example a data structure which describes a complete road network whose elements must be recognized by an evaluation device, so that the traveled section is not confused with running nearby other streets.
  • the algorithm that determines a measure of the likelihood that a road has traveled will need to evaluate the entire specified course and not be averaged over stakes of the entire route. • The algorithm in the evaluation unit must have enough data available for a decision or be transmitted from a central office.

Landscapes

  • Engineering & Computer Science (AREA)
  • Radar, Positioning & Navigation (AREA)
  • Remote Sensing (AREA)
  • Automation & Control Theory (AREA)
  • Physics & Mathematics (AREA)
  • General Physics & Mathematics (AREA)
  • Devices For Checking Fares Or Tickets At Control Points (AREA)
  • Traffic Control Systems (AREA)
  • Navigation (AREA)

Abstract

La présente invention concerne un procédé d'évaluation permettant d'identifier des routes empruntées qui sont par exemple soumises à péage, au moyen de valeurs de mesure détectées dans le véhicule, par exemple la position et la direction de conduite. Les tracés des routes qui mènent à un point de décision sont alors enregistrés de façon exclusive ou prépondérante dans l'appareil d'évaluation. Ces tracés sont à nouveau enregistrés respectivement à une telle distance du point de décision que les valeurs de mesure des capteurs présents dans le véhicule fournissent au moins une valeur unique comprise dans la tolérance, qui permet d'identifier de façon univoque si un des tracés de route alternatifs est emprunté. Cette invention permet donc d'identifier de manière fiable les routes empruntées parmi celles qui ne mènent pas à un point de décision.
EP06776852A 2005-08-19 2006-08-15 Procede d'evaluation pour identifier des routes empruntees Withdrawn EP1922702A1 (fr)

Applications Claiming Priority (2)

Application Number Priority Date Filing Date Title
DE102005039584 2005-08-19
PCT/EP2006/008043 WO2007020053A1 (fr) 2005-08-19 2006-08-15 Procede d'evaluation pour identifier des routes empruntees

Publications (1)

Publication Number Publication Date
EP1922702A1 true EP1922702A1 (fr) 2008-05-21

Family

ID=37189403

Family Applications (1)

Application Number Title Priority Date Filing Date
EP06776852A Withdrawn EP1922702A1 (fr) 2005-08-19 2006-08-15 Procede d'evaluation pour identifier des routes empruntees

Country Status (3)

Country Link
US (1) US20080312816A1 (fr)
EP (1) EP1922702A1 (fr)
WO (1) WO2007020053A1 (fr)

Families Citing this family (2)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
US9428187B2 (en) * 2014-06-05 2016-08-30 GM Global Technology Operations LLC Lane change path planning algorithm for autonomous driving vehicle
US10497256B1 (en) * 2018-07-26 2019-12-03 Here Global B.V. Method, apparatus, and system for automatic evaluation of road closure reports

Family Cites Families (4)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
DE59407782D1 (de) * 1993-11-26 1999-03-18 Mannesmann Ag Einrichtung in einem fahrzeug zur feststellung des betretens einer teilstrecke eines vorgegebenen strassennetzes
DE19836485A1 (de) * 1998-08-12 2000-02-17 Bosch Gmbh Robert Verfahren zum Bestimmen einer Route von einem Ausgangspunkt zu einem Zielpunkt auf einem Routennetz
DE19856184A1 (de) * 1998-12-05 2000-06-08 Alcatel Sa Verfahren zur fahrzeuginternen Feststellung, ob sich das Fahrzeug auf einer von mehreren vorgegebenen Straßen befindet
DE10205453A1 (de) * 2002-02-08 2003-08-28 Albert Renftle Positionsbestimmungsverfahren für ein Verkehrsgebühren-Erhebungssystem

Non-Patent Citations (1)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Title
See references of WO2007020053A1 *

Also Published As

Publication number Publication date
WO2007020053A1 (fr) 2007-02-22
US20080312816A1 (en) 2008-12-18

Similar Documents

Publication Publication Date Title
EP0759151B1 (fr) Procede de correction et systeme de navigation pour le reperage a l'estime d'un vehicule a moteur
DE102015207804B4 (de) Verfahren zum Erkennen von Parkflächen und/oder Freiflächen
WO2020025084A1 (fr) Détermination d'un parcours d'une voie
WO2002007125A1 (fr) Procede de determination d'informations relatives a la situation du trafic
DE4233546A1 (de) Verfahren zum Korrigieren von Achszählfehlern in Eisenbahnalagen sowie Einrichtung zur Durchführung des Verfahrens
DE102015108759A1 (de) Verfahren zum Klassifizieren eines länglich ausgedehnten stationären Objektes in einem seitlichen Umgebungsbereich eines Kraftfahrzeugs, Fahrerassistenzsystem sowie Kraftfahrzeug
DE102007028325B4 (de) Ortungsvorrichtung zur Ermittlung der Position von fahrweggebundenen Fahrzeugen
DE102018009114A1 (de) Verfahren zur Bestimmung der Position eines auf einer Verfahrfläche bewegbaren Mobilteils und Anlage mit Mobilteil zur Durchführung des Verfahrens
DE102013016596A1 (de) Verfahren zum Betreiben einer Fahrerassistenzeinrichtung
DE102020118629B4 (de) Computerimplementiertes Verfahren zum Bestimmen der Validität einer geschätzten Position eines Fahrzeugs
EP3279049B1 (fr) Système de commande et procédé de commande pour déterminer une voie de circulation
WO2006005696A1 (fr) Procede et dispositif pour compenser des tolerances de montage d'un capteur de distances
EP3170692B1 (fr) Procédé et dispositif de détermination d'au moins une quantité d'énergie individuelle d'un véhicule
EP1922702A1 (fr) Procede d'evaluation pour identifier des routes empruntees
WO2019223833A1 (fr) Commande d'un véhicule à moteur
WO2020200593A1 (fr) Procédé de détection d'écarts systématiques lors de la détermination d'une grandeur de mouvement d'un véhicule terrestre, en particulier d'un véhicule ferroviaire
DE19844289C2 (de) Verfahren und Vorrichtung zum Zuordnen von von einem fahrzeugseitigen Endgerät ermittelten Stützpunktinformationen
DE102006033210A1 (de) System und Verfahren zur Bestimmung der momentanen Ortsposition von Fahrzeugen, insbesondere von Zügen
EP2130740B1 (fr) Dispositif de commande pour une bosse de triage du trafic ferroviaire et procédé de fonctionnement d'une telle bosse
DE102020209352A1 (de) Verfahren zur Prädiktion eines Fahrmanövers in einem Fahrerassistenzsystem
DE102020118622A1 (de) Steuerung eines Fahrzeugs
DE10242808B4 (de) Verfahren und Vorrichtung zur Erkennung von Hindernissen und/oder Verkehrsteilnehmern
DE102018219256A1 (de) Ermitteln einer Degradation einer bestimmten Gleiskomponente
DE102017210131A1 (de) Verfahren, Computer-Programm-Produkt und Bahnfahrzeug, insbesondere Schienenfahrzeug, zur Fahrspurerkennung im Bahnverkehr, insbesondere zur Gleiserkennung im Schienenverkehr
DE102010041583A1 (de) Verfahren zur Ermittlung eines Qualitätsdatenwerts von Verkehrsstörungsmeldeverfahren

Legal Events

Date Code Title Description
PUAI Public reference made under article 153(3) epc to a published international application that has entered the european phase

Free format text: ORIGINAL CODE: 0009012

17P Request for examination filed

Effective date: 20080117

AK Designated contracting states

Kind code of ref document: A1

Designated state(s): AT BE BG CH CY CZ DE DK EE ES FI FR GB GR HU IE IS IT LI LT LU LV MC NL PL PT RO SE SI SK TR

STAA Information on the status of an ep patent application or granted ep patent

Free format text: STATUS: THE APPLICATION IS DEEMED TO BE WITHDRAWN

18D Application deemed to be withdrawn

Effective date: 20100302