Avoiding Red Lights By Booking Ahead 299
RedEaredSlider writes "Peter Stone, associate professor of computer science at the University of Texas at Austin, has presented an idea at the AAAS meeting today for managing intersections: a computer in a car calls ahead to the nearest intersection it is headed towards, and says it will arrive at a given time. The intersection checks to see if anyone else is arriving then, and if the slot is open, it tells the car to proceed. If it isn't, it tells the car that the car remains responsible for slowing down or stopping. He says that even with only a few connected cars, the system still works, even if the benefits are still only to those who have the connected vehicles."
Already implemented here (Score:5, Insightful)
There are induction loops (metal dectors) buried in the pavement that tell the traffic lights about approaching cars. When my car passes over the loop it is telling the traffic signal at the intersection that I will be arriving within 10 seconds. If there is no cross traffic the light tells me to proceed by changing to green (or remaining green).
I've been doing this for years (Score:5, Insightful)
Any time you are driving on surface streets (hate that term), you soon learn to "drive the stop-lights" by looking ahead a block or two. Its
not that hard, and even when you can't see the lights driving just about the speed limit will be close enough to get you 5 greens out of 6 tries.
That being said, anything that can guarantee more greens is welcome, but putting it in cars seems the wrong approach. If the stop lights just
talked to each other you would have enough info. When Stoplight A can't clear its queue in the allotted green, you can pretty much bet stoplight B won't be able to do so when that slug of cars reaches it.
In most cases the problem is dumb signals, hold overs from the Pleistocene, with no attempt to make traffic efficient.
Car? (Score:5, Insightful)
Why not just use smart phones it'd be just as simple to attach the correct sensor or it may be able to use the gps most of them already have.
A possible improvement (Score:5, Insightful)
If the light doesn't have a slot knows there will be one available just a bit later, the light can signal the car to coast down from 45MPH to 35MPH, arriving just a bit later. By doing so it reduces the energy lost into the brakes and the car ends up coasting through the intersection on the green light instead of stopping and then having to restart just a few seconds later.
You can do this manually by paying attention to what's going on in the next several stoplights. It saves gas and brake wear. It's kind of nice just cruising along and hitting all the lights. Getting feedback from the light would make it much more effective.
Unfortunately it also drives some drivers crazy. They can't stand it that I'm going 35MPH in a 45MPH zone and go racing past... Just to end up stopped at a stoplight which then turns green a few seconds later and I go drifting on past. And still they don't get it.
The Good Professor is Confused (Score:4, Insightful)
Perhaps things are different in Texas, but where I live the majority of traffic lights and stop signs are installed for the express purpose of impeding the flow of traffic. Trying to sell them a sensible system to improve traffic flow, reduce pollution and ticketable offenses is the last thing they'd be interested in.
Re:What happens when people change their minds.. (Score:5, Insightful)
Sorry... FAIL. This system will ONLY work if we remove humans as a variable in the equation.
Seriously? FAIL? You find one particular scenario where it would provide optimal performance and somehow this means the system has failed? So what is your solution then? Do not implement a system that would make traffic flow better in 90% of cases just because the 10% would not be improved?
<RANT> /. on stories about inventions. People either dismiss it because of one edge case (like now), or they will say that they personally do not need the technology so it should not be implemented. Myself, I use public transport more often than I drive but that doesn't mean that I think we should not improve traffic flow for cars. To do so would be amazingly self-centered.
It is a curious reaction that we often see on
</RANT>
As to your particular concern, we are in the process of removing humans as a variable. Even ignoring the work being done on auto-driving cars, how many cars do you see with navigation systems in them these days. Sure, you don't input your destination into these every time if you know where you are going, but would you do so if it meant that you were more likely to get a dream run of green traffic lights?
Re:The Good Professor is Confused (Score:5, Insightful)
It's fucking retarded. Try walking outside high noon in August in this city. Your face will melt off and your sneakers will turn into a puddle of gummy ooze.
If you actually went out in that weather regularly maybe you'd acclimatize to it. Why live in perpetual war with your environment?