A Reservation-Based Smart Parking System
A Reservation-Based Smart Parking System
7-2011
Wang, Hongwei, "A Reservation-based Smart Parking System" (2011). Computer Science and Engineering: Theses, Dissertations, and
Student Research. 29.
http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/computerscidiss/29
This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Computer Science and Engineering, Department of at DigitalCommons@University of
Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in Computer Science and Engineering: Theses, Dissertations, and Student Research by an
authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln.
A RESERVATION-BASED SMART PARKING SYSTEM
by
Hongwei Wang
A THESIS
Lincoln, Nebraska
July, 2011
A RESERVATION-BASED SMART PARKING SYSTEM
Hongwei Wang, M. S.
University of Nebraska, 2011
In metropolitan areas, parking management influences drivers search time and cost
for parking spaces, parking revenue, and traffic congestion. The wide deployment
of wireless parking meters with sensing and communications capabilities allows
the parking authority to monitor the state of each parking space in real time and
optimize the parking management.
In this thesis, we study state-of-the-art parking policies in smart parking
systems, and show that the smart parking system needs to be “smarter”. Our
design goals of the smart parking systems include: (1) simplify the operations of
parking systems, (2) improve drivers’ satisfaction, (3) increase parking revenue,
and (4) alleviate traffic congestion. Through analysis and simulations, we first
show that the proposed reservation-based parking policy has the potential to
achieve the above goals. We then model the behavior of both service providers
and drivers in smart parking systems, and explore the dynamic pricing scheme to
achieve the goals in smart parking system design.
Furthermore, we design and implement a prototype of Reservation-based Smart
Parking System (RSPS) that allows drivers to effectively find and reserve the vacant
parking spaces. With the real time tracking of parking status via various sensing
technologies, a smart parking system will dynamically update the parking price
according to the physical parking status, and the parking price will affect drivers
decision on parking slot selection, therefore, affect the parking status. A smart
parking system can be regarded as a full-fledged cyber-physical system (CPS).
Through extensive experiment based on real traffic traces and a real-world parking
map, the results show that the proposed reservation-based parking policy has the
potential to simplify the operations of parking systems, as well as alleviate traffic
congestion caused by searching for parking.
iv
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Contents
Contents v
1 Introduction 1
1.1 Approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.1.1 A Reservation-based Solution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.1.2 Dynamic Pricing Scheme . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1.2 Contributions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1.3 Thesis Organization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4 System Design 26
4.1 Hardware Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
4.2 Software Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
5 Evaluation 34
5.1 Simulator Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
5.1.1 Real Map Import . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
5.1.2 Parking Demand Modeling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
5.1.3 Simulator Implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
5.2 Simulation Setup . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
5.3 Experimental Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
5.3.1 Traffic Searching for Parking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
5.3.2 Revenue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
5.3.3 Service Differentiation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
6.2.1 Synchronization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
6.2.2 System Deployment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
6.2.3 Security and Privacy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
Bibliography 49
viii
List of Figures
Chapter 1
Introduction
The study of Cyber-Physical System (CPS) has become a key area of research.
It refers to a new generation of systems with integrated computation and com-
munication capabilities that allow users to interact with the physical world. The
ability of interaction with physical world is a key catalyst for future technology
development. CPS, therefore, provides significant opportunities for design and
development of next-generation traffic management solutions. As an important
component of traffic system, parking management system is playing an important
role and affecting people’s daily life. By detecting and processing the information
from parking lots, smart parking system allows drivers to obtain real-time parking
information and alleviates parking contentions, which is a practical application of
CPS.
The parking industry generates billions of dollars in annual revenue in the
United States alone, and parking regulations may affect people’s concerns about
traffic congestion, air pollution, drivers’ frustration about parking searching, and
municipal objectives. For instance, a recent survey [29] shows that during rush
hour in most big cities, the traffic generated by cars searching for parking spaces
2
takes up to 40% of the total traffic. Therefore, in these densely populated urban
areas, a certain amount of traffic congestion and delay are due to parking. A recent
study [25] shows, in a business district of Los Angeles, vehicles looking for parking
burn 47,000 gallons of gasoline and produced 730 tons of carbon dioxide, which
is equivalent of 38 trips around the world. Clearly, the problems associated with
parking imposes significant societal costs, both economically and ecologically [18].
In order to address these problems associated with parking, smart parking
systems aiming to satisfy the involved parties (e.g., parking service providers and
drivers) have been developed. However, most current smart parking or parking
guidance systems [1, 2] only collect and publish live parking information to direct
drivers to available parking spaces near their destinations. These systems are
not “smart” enough, because they cannot successfully help drivers find a desired
parking space in crowded areas, and sometimes make the situation worse. For
example, if available spaces in a congested area are less than the spaces in demand,
more drivers trying to park will head for the limited available spaces, causing
severer congestion. In this case, detailed information associated with parking
availability would allow drivers to make better decisions on use of parking lots
and road-side parking.
In contrast to such parking information guidance systems, this thesis presents
a Reservation-based Smart Parking System (RSPS) that not only to broadcast real-time
parking price based on the parking availability to the drivers as part of a communal
application, but also to provide reservation service as part of user-targeted service.
Built on advanced sensing and mobile communication techniques, RSPS processes
streams of timestamped sensing data from sensor network in parking lot, calculates
the real-time parking price based on parking availability information and publishes
the parking price to the drivers. On the other side, the drivers can retrieve parking
3
price and reserve their desired vacant spaces via Wi-Fi or Internet.
1.1 Approach
Based on the observation that parking space reservation can help drivers to reduce
the search time dramatically, we propose a reservation-based solution, built on
advanced sensing and mobile communication technology, with the objectives to
alleviate the parking contention, balance the benefits between parking service
providers and drivers, coordinate among service providers, differentiate the needs
of individual drivers, and reduce the amount of traffic searching for parking as
well. To achieve the design goals, a powerful tool to model the behavior of both
service providers and drivers is required. Meanwhile, we need to design control
signals to guide the parking selection of large scale, autonomous drivers.
4
Normally, a parking system manages the parking resources, and the drivers buy
or reserve the permits to park somewhere they want within a specific parking
district for the chunk of time they purchase. In the proposed model, the parking
management system adopts dynamic pricing scheme to generate prices for parking
spaces in different parking lots. The parking price reflects the real time parking
availability. It not only serves as a control signal to balance the parking lot
utilization, but also improves the revenue for service providers. On the other
hand, drivers rely on the utility functions to determine where to park (e.g., select
the most convenient parking spaces) under a certain budget constraint. Through
the simulations, we will show that: the amount of traffic searching for parking
is reduced, the solution guarantees the service quality for different users and the
revenue is increased for service providers.
1.2 Contributions
• The RSPS provides parking reservation service, which focuses on the entire
parking condition in certain area, instead of single parking lot. With the
real-time reservation service, the drivers can find and reserve their desired
5
vacant parking spaces quickly. Therefore, the gasoline and time in search of
vacant parking space is reduced.
• We design the dynamic parking price scheme for parking service. In order
to satisfy the different concerns from different parts in parking system, the
dynamic price scheme is designed to generate more parking revenue, provide
differentiated services for different drivers and reduce the parking congestion.
In this thesis, we demonstrate that it is able to reduce the traffic congestion
caused by parking searching.
The rest of this thesis is organized as follows. In Chapter 2, we set the background
of the proposed research by introducing performance metrics and several exist-
ing approaches for smart parking systems, and summarize the related work. In
Chapter 3, we present the details of Reservation-based Smart Parking (RSP) man-
agement solution. In Chapter 4, we present the detailed architecture of proposed
reservation-based smart parking system. In Chapter 5, we evaluate the proposed
RSP management solution through extensive simulation. Finally, we conclude this
thesis and discuss the future work in Chapter 6.
6
Chapter 2
In this thesis, we mainly focus on a management system that assists drivers to find
parking spaces in a specific parking district, and satisfies the needs of both parking
providers and drivers. In addition, an important goal of the system is to reduce the
traffic searching for parking, hence reduce energy consumption and air pollution.
In this chapter, we review background on smart parking systems, including the
performance metrics, existing solutions and challenges. We also briefly discuss the
related work.
• Traffic Searching for Parking: The traffic generated by drivers searching for
parking is not negligible and reflects the social welfare. Hence, an efficient
parking guidance system should efficiently reduce the traffic searching for
parking. Also, reducing the amount of searching time for parking is desired
by drivers.
We now introduce several existing parking guidance approaches and show their
limitations. We simulate the parking system performance under different parking
management strategies and show results in Chapter 5.
8
• Parking Information Sharing (PIS): This mechanism represents the current state
of the smart parking system design. When a driver obtains the parking
availability information near his or her destination, the driver will know if
the desired parking lot has available spaces. Hence, individual drivers make
the decision according to the parking availability information. If a parking
lot has a very few parking spaces available in busy hours, it is likely that
more drivers struggle for less parking spaces. This phenomenon is called
“multiple-car-chasing-single-space”, which may cause severe congestion.
2.3 Challenges
Given the design objectives of smart parking systems that requires the coordination
among multiple parties, we summarize the main design considerations as follows:
As alluded to above, the blind search system is an open loop system, where
users make decision without looking at the state of the system. The PIS and
10
BPIS strategies allow drivers to make decisions based on the system state (e.g.,
parking availability information). However, since the drivers can obtain the infor-
mation of parking availability, they may pursue limited parking spaces in busy
district resulting more traffic contention. To solve this phenomena of multiple-
car-chase-single-space and reduce the traffic searching for parking, we suggest a
reservation-based system, where drivers make reservations through the parking
management system. If a driver makes the reservation successfully, it guarantees
an available parking space for him, and the driver can park at the reserved space
without searching. The reservation-based system allows drivers to select the most
convenient parking space under their budget constraints. To address the design
challenges, we use a dynamic pricing scheme to determine the reservation charge
for parking. This will regulate the parking behavior of drivers, and fulfill the
needs of service providers. The detailed model for drivers and service providers is
introduced in Chapter 3.
Currently, most research work on smart parking is from the perspective of system
design, which focus on implementing a wireless sensor network to detect parking
information and provide real-time parking service. In addition, we introduce the
pricing-related topics in networks, which provide us a powerful tool to manage
parking lots.
physical environment. There are several research challenges for CPS, including
(1) CPS composition, (2) robustness, safety, and security of CPS, (3) control and
hybrid systems, (4) computational abstractions, (5) architecture, (6) real-time em-
bedded systems abstractions, (7) sensor and mobile networks, (8) model-based
development of CPS, (9) verification, validation, and certification of CPS and (10)
education and training.
As an important application of CPS, transportation cyber-physical system [5, 32,
31, 9] enables people to reach their destination safely and reliably. In [5], the author
mainly discusses the cyber-physical aerospace, which is relevant to the challenges
and future directions in transportation and exploration systems. The transportation
cyber-physical system improves the dramatic safety and transportation efficiency,
such as anti-lock brakes and advanced flight management systems. The air
transportation network is an example of transportation cyber-physical system.
The air traffic is suffering adverse weather and density problem. The CPS should
provide an adaptive flight planning capability with seamless integration of strategic
and tactical reasoning system. In [32], the author describes the impact of the
mobile internet to change the transportation cyber-physical system. With the rapid
development of mobile technology in last five years, it is constructing the dedicated
infrastructure systems to monitor traffic. The Smartphone with localization module
is changing the traffic monitoring system. It is able to provide the real-time traffic
information for entire transportation network. As one of the first instantiation
of transportation cyber-physical systems, the traffic information system is being
progressively influenced by mobile technology. On the other hand, there are
still some promising and fundamental challenges of mobile device technology
remaining to be solved. In [31], the author presents the limitations of current
automotive Cyber-Physical System. Because of its vehicle-centric view, it only
13
from drivers at three stations provide the insight of potential demand for smart
parking system. Since the drivers also appear to use the Internet frequently, it
demonstrates the potential of smart parking reservation service, which will be
detailedly discussed in Chapter 3. In order to evaluate the smart parking field,
they implement two user interfaces: two VMSs that display parking availability
information, and a centralized intelligent reservation system. The survey results
from their test suggest that a potential market for a daily paid parking service.
However, only providing availability information may cause some other serious
problems, such as the “multiple-car-chase-single-slot” phenomenon.
As a part of Smart Parking System, the parking lot detection has been developed
by Jake Reisdorff et al. [22] as a course project under the supervision of Dr. Sharad
Seth in Computer Science & Engineering at University of Nebraska-Lincoln. The
project is aimed to providing a parking garage detection solution that is accessible
by a webpage. Specifically, they focus on the Stadium Drive parking garage on the
UNL city campus on which to test their project. They use a mounted camera in the
garage to take images from a static position, and send to a web server. The server
runs an image processing application to detect if the parking spaces are available
or not, and deliver the raw data of image process to the web application. Based on
the raw data, the web application determines the number of unoccupied spaces,
and show a map of parking garage with availability information.
15
Chapter 3
Fig. 3.1 shows three components in the system, including parking lots, users
and the management system. The management system determines the dynamic
parking prices based on real-time parking information, and broadcast live parking
prices to users (also drivers). The price reflects the relationship between demand
and supply, and implies the congestion level. Upon receiving dynamic parking
prices, the user selects a desired parking lot and reserves a space in the parking lot.
According to his budget constraint and convenience degree, the parking decision
would vary by user. As a result, the state of parking resources is changed by users’
18
Users Management
System
Price Database
Parking Prices
Price Decision
Infornmation Analysis
Parking Lots
Parking Resources
parking decisions. The parking lot consists of a group of parking spaces. The
on-street parking can also be considered as a virtual parking lot. The state of a
parking lot is the number of occupied spaces versus total spaces. Every parking
lot has access to the Internet to communicate with the management system and
users, and share parking information with other parking lots. In each parking
lot, the reservation authority is deployed for authenticating the individual user’s
identity and reservation request. In this case, the reservation authority in the
parking lot communicates with the specific user individually. Once the reservation
order is confirmed, the reservation authority updates reservation information to
hold the related space for the user. The sensor system deployed in parking lot is
responsible for monitoring the real-time condition of parking lots and delivers the
live aggregated sensing information (the number of available spaces or occupancy
rate) to the management system. The sensing information is updated on demand.
19
Upon retrieving the parking information, the management system updates the
state of the parking lot. Based on the state of parking lots, the management
system (1) analyzes their occupancy status and congestion level, (2) determines the
parking prices according to dynamic pricing scheme, (3) broadcasts the prices to
all users periodically, and (4) stores the parking information and prices for further
analysis. The management system serves as the centralized decision-making body
in a planned economy. It makes all pricing decisions regarding the state of parking
lots and user demands [20]. This system is a closed-loop system to dynamically
adjust parking price, balance the benefits between users, and service providers
and reduce traffic searching for parking.
By placing the reservation authority in individual parking lots, we simplify a
lot of issues related to the implementation, including communication overhead,
reservation synchronization and load balancing. Since each user only has to
communicate with his desired parking lot to make his reservation, rather than
the centralized management system, the communication overhead of reservation
is highly reduced. Also, since each parking lot manages its own reservation
information, it makes the reservation requests from users easily to be synchronized,
comparing with reservation synchronization in the management system.
To model user behavior, we use the framework of the competitive market model
[27], which includes two agents: consumers and producers. To describe the
relationship between service providers (also producers) and users (also consumers),
the price of parking service is defined as the exchange rate of parking spaces,
dynamically determined by parking demands and congestion level. Given dynamic
20
parking price, a user selects a parking space under his budget constraint. Upon
receiving the prices of parking lots that have available spaces, the user selects
a convenient lot to park from those whose prices are acceptable. In order to
model the parking decision behavior, we define the utility function to balance the
convenience and cost in the parking process.
In the real world, users desire to maximize the convenience and minimize the
parking cost, though trade-off must be made. Here, given the parking price p of
specific parking lot, the relative cost is defined as a function of p, C ( p) = κ p b,
where κ denotes the user’s sensitivity to the price and b is the budget constraint
of the user. In this case, a user with higher budget will have more tolerance for
higher price and tend to pursue the parking space providing more convenience.
Meanwhile, the convenience can be measured by walking distance d, hence the
gain of a user is a function of d,
dm
B (d) = υ log , for d ≤ dm (3.1)
d
where B represents the convenience if the user selects a parking lot with the
walking distance d, dm denotes the maximum walking distance the user can
tolerate, and υ represents the sensitivity to walking distance. As represented in the
literature [11][28], when all user utilities are defined as logarithmic, the optimal
solution becomes proportionally fair. Accordingly, the optimization of the utility
function for a user’s task of parking selection in an area that contains multiple
21
h i
max U = max B d j − C p j
j j
pj
dm (3.2)
= max υ log j − κ
j d b
s.t. p j ≤ b d j ≤ dm
where p j represents the parking price at jth parking lot and d j is the distance from
jth parking lot to the user’s destination. Note that, since users make their parking
decision during one time slot, the utility function is only for a given time slot.
For an individual user, the parking decision is to maximize the utility, which is a
function of parking price and walking distance. The user’s decision cannot have
impact on other user’s decision, although the parking price may be modified by the
change in demand of the users. Furthermore, in reality, a user with high budget
may desire more convenience, which means the maximum walking distance he
can tolerate may be less. In our model, to avoid computation complexity, we
use the constant values for maximum walking distance and budget to imply this
relationship.
Service providers that own the parking resources (parking lots) collect real-time
parking information to determine the parking prices, and broadcast them to the
drivers to help them make reservations. From the perspective of service providers,
dynamic pricing scheme is for generating more revenue from the parking service,
supporting service differentiation for users with different requirements and bud-
gets, and reducing the traffic searching for parking. On the other hand, users desire
22
to learn parking information from the parking price and obtain the guarantee of
service quality.
In order to achieve these design goals, the formulation of dynamic pricing is
decomposed into usage price (pu ), statistical price (ps ), and congestion price (pc ).
Specifically, the usage price is determined by the real-time state of parking lot
aiming for reflecting real-time parking condition and increasing the revenue; the
statistical price is measured by the historical price, which provides users with a
reasonable price for their reservation time period and reduce the potential traffic
of parking searching; and the congestion price reflects the congestion in near future,
and prevents the sudden increase of the parking demand. Both usage price and
congestion price are computed periodically, with the interval τ, statistical price is
computed on demand. The parking price p is represented as
p = β u pu + β s ps + β c pc (3.3)
profit: " #
I
max
piu
∑ (xi piu − f ( ji , J ))
i (3.4)
subject to: xi , ji ≤ J
where xi represents the total demand for parking spaces with price piu during
ith time slots, I is the total time slots, and f ( ji , J ) is the function of parking cost
associated with occupied parking spaces ji and total parking spaces J.
According to the utility function of users described above, users select their parking
lots based on walking distance and parking price. However, since users estimate
walking distance depending on their own capability and other unexpected factors,
the service provider cannot learn this behavior from the users. So we simply
assume that the total demand xi for parking spaces with price piu is determined by
the price, which can be represented as
Ci
xi = (3.5)
δi piu
where Ci represents the total number of users whose budgets are higher than piu
and δi is the parameter of preference to choose a parking lot with price piu .
Denote the basic price of parking service with the lowest utilization by pbasic . ϕi
is used for adjusting the basic price based on real-time state of parking lot, the
service price can be estimated as piu = ϕi pbasic /(1 − σi ), where σi is the utilization
of specific parking lot. The effective demand associated with σi is Ci /δi piu (1 − σi ).
Accordingly, the Equation (3.4) can be written as
" #
I
Ci i ϕi pbasic
max
piu
∑ p
δi piu u
− f j i
, J , p i
u =
(1 − σ i )
i (3.6)
Ci
s.t. i i ≤ J, ϕi ≤ 1
δ p u (1 − σ i )
24
" #
I
Ci Ci
max
piu
∑ δi
+λ J− i i
δ ϕ pbasic
− f ji , J (3.7)
i
The statistical price is set to predict the parking price beyond the current time
slot. If a user reserves a parking space during the upcoming time slots, the
service provider will impose an opportunity cost by depriving other users of the
opportunity to be admitted to use that parking space. However, the live usage
pricing cannot correctly reflect the opportunity cost in the future. In this case, the
service provider has to provide a new fair charge to predict future parking price,
instead of selling resources at the current usage price. Since the total traffic flows
are periodic, the parking conditions are similarly changing. Therefore, the historic
data provides the service provider a powerful tool to predict the parking price
over future time slots. So the statistical price ( pis ) of parking reservation service is
defined as
I0 h i avg i
i
( k −1)
∑ $pu + (1 − $) pu
i
pis = (3.9)
I0
where pis is the statistical price for the ith time slot during the current time period
kth (we use one day works as one time period that consists of I time slots), I 0 is the
i avg
total time slot that user reserves, pu is the average usage price at the ith time slot
i
in all last periods, pu(k−1) is the usage price at ith time slot during last (k − 1)th time
period, and $ is weight parameter.
25
By providing users this statistical price, the service provider lets users learn the
future parking price, which can prevent potential congestion. At the same time,
since the statistical price can predict the future usage price, this more reasonable
price allows the service providers to increase the revenue and users’ satisfaction.
To avoid many users pursuing a few parking spaces and alleviate traffic congestion
caused by parking searching, we propose an additional price component, which
is congestion-sensitive to encourage users to balance their parking selections and
reduce congestion. The congestions considered are traffic congestion and parking
congestion. Since the traffic congestion cannot be monitored by parking sensors
directly, and many traffic congestions are not caused by parking searching, we
only focus on the growth rate of parking occupancy to indicate traffic condition.
If the traffic searching for parking spaces gives contribution to traffic congestion,
the rate of parking occupancy has to grow dramatically in short time. Moreover,
when the available parking spaces are lower than a certain proportion, it will cause
parking congestion and conflicts if too many users pursue these spaces. Therefore,
two kinds of congestion pricing are considered: pricing when the growth rate of
occupancy exceeds a certain threshold, and pricing when the parking occupancy
reaches certain level. Both pricing are calculated iteratively to prevent the price
highly oscillating. This kind of change in price, increasing when the supply is
below users’ demand and decreasing when the supply exceeds users’ demand,
can regulate the relationship of supply and demand to reach certain equilibrium.
In this paper, we classify the congestion level with congestion factor l. When the
congestion factor exceeds the threshold of certain level, an additional congestion
26
price is charged. The congestion price pic during ith time slot is given by
+
( i −1) dr ri − riavg
pic = pc + ξl + ωl ,0 (3.10)
di riavg
where ξ l and ω l are the congestion parameters to adjust the weight according the
different congestion factors l, and ri and riavg represent the occupancy rate and
average occupancy rate during ith time slot.
During the congestion, the users have to suffer the extra congestion charge, or
select other parking lots with lower parking charge. So Equation (3.10) drives
the user demand towards the parking lots with lower occupancy rate and less
growth rate. The provider applies the congestion charge when the congestion
reaches certain level, and adjusts the congestion charge and level dynamically
according to the real-time parking information. After the congestion is removed,
the congestion price is decreased gradually to zero to avoid further congestion and
price oscillation if new congestion is found.
In this section, we have presented a dynamic pricing scheme consisting of three
different pricing components: usage charge, statistical charge and congestion charge.
Both the usage price and congestion price are adjusted periodically in a given time
scale. And the real-time price information is stored in a database for statistical
price and further analysis. In reality, the users only need to know the total price,
instead of specific price components.
27
Chapter 4
System Design
With the model details as given above, we now present the design of Reservation-
based Smart Parking System (RSPS). The various components of our design are
closely inter-related. Given this interaction, we first present the design concerns of
the system in this section, before moving on to the details in subsequent sections.
• Reservation Performance: The RSPS utilizes both the Internet and Wi-Fi,
whereby drivers can check the real-time parking information and complete
their reservation. However, there is a bottleneck to the system when many
drivers are simultaneously making reservation. In this case, the system
has to synchronize the parking information and handle each reservation
request, which significantly reduce the system performance, and even cause
some conflicts. In order to address this challenge, we design a distributed
reservation strategy implemented in the proposed smart parking system.
When a driver selects the desired parking lot, the system will reconnect the
driver to the subsystem in related parking lot, the driver can complete the
reservation without communicating with the central system. Therefore, the
central system no longer needs to maintain the reservation service.
28
• Data Collection and Local Presentation: The system collects and stores the data
about the performance metrics, including the status of parking space, reser-
vation time, parking location, driver’s identity. All data stored by the system
is at least stamped with time metadata. Furthermore, the system allows the
driver to check the parking information, including the location of parking
spaces, the vacancy time of parking spaces and reservation information. In
order to protect the security of the system, we separately design a repository
of sensing data and a mirror database of reservation. The repository is the
sink of the sensing data, and the mirror database is synchronized with the
repository and stores the reservation information. In this way, the drivers are
only able to check and update the information in the mirror database.
The system hardware is organized into three main components, the sensor network,
the central server and the mobile device, as shown in Fig 4.1. In the following, we
discuss the detailed design and implementation of each component, along with
the specification of communication between them. In our project, we developed
a number of functions on Zigbee sensors that provide a continuous measure of
parking status for each space. Each sensor is integrated with two wireless mote.
29
The wireless mote platform provides a 250 kpps 802.15.4 wireless radio, 8 channel
A/D and an 8 MHz microcontroller for on board digital signal processing. Mote 1
hosts light and vibration sensors, which is used to detect the vehicles. In reality, the
light sensor is easily interfered by light sources. So we use highly directional beam
to strengthen light and reduce the interference. Mote 2 hosts the communication
module of Bluetooth. As a result, the sensor bridges the communication between
the Zigbee on mote and the Bluetooth module on smartphone (e.g., Android G1).
In this case, the sensor confirm the identity of users when vehicle is detected in
reserved parking lot.
30
The mobile phone is used to assess Internet, over Wi-Fi or a GSM cellular
network, to obtain the information of parking availability and make parking
reservation from the Internet server. The mobile phone also provides the Bluetooth
module to communicate with sensors when verifying the driver’s identity.
There are a central Ethernet-connected server deployed with storage and compu-
tational power. These servers provide hardware support for the software services,
which are described in section III.C. In particular, it is for system users to request
the services of parking information and parking reservation. Once user’s reser-
vation is authorized, the server will update the state of related parking sensor by
wireless low power link, IEEE 802.15.4.
Fig. 4.2 shows the design of software architecture, primarily defining the iRev,
which is the central location of the system to host applications and functions as the
point of control and configuration for the distributed system. Primary software
elements are discussed in the following.
RSPS has a subsystem of sensor network in the parking lots. The sensor
networks provide the real-time parking information to the upper layer. Here we
categorize sensor nodes to detecting nodes and collecting nodes. Specifically, the
detecting nodes take the responsibility to monitor the status of parking spaces, as
well as communicate with mobile phones. Moreover, the collecting nodes advertise
itself as the root node and are responsible to collect and deliver the detected event
and data from detecting nodes.The sensor nodes are able to achieve end-to-end
connectivity across a set of nodes and access points by implementing collection
tree protocol.
31
Web Server
iRev
iRev Applications
Parking Info
Repository
Mirror Data
Database Sync
Query Stack
Sensor Network
As the middle layer between the sensor network and web server, the iRev is
the sink for all data sent from the lower sensor nodes. To simplify application
development, we have developed query stack for delay-tolerant continuous query
processing. Meanwhile, the parking information repository can retrieve real-time
sensing data stream. To transfer data efficiently and reduce the complexity of
the system, we have developed data synchronization processor that can connect
and synchronize the data between parking information repository and mirror
database. The user can check the parking price and make their reservation via
mirror database, and data synchronization processor takes the responsibility to
transfer related data to repository. In this case, the security of parking information
is protected, as well as the information redundancy is reduced. Based on the
real-time parking data, there are four specific applications in the iRev, including
32
Wi-Fi monitor, reservation authority, price decider and smart payment. (1) Wi-Fi
monitor is designed to monitor and report on Wi-Fi Access Points. It monitors
and reports on performance, availability and problems. (2) Reservation authority
is responsible for verifying the reservation process and driver’s identity. (3) Price
decider is to determine the parking price based the parking state. (4) Mobile
payment allows drivers to use their mobile phones to pay parking fee.
RSPS provides the web service to the drivers, as shown in Fig. 4.3 and 4.4.
When the sensor network in parking lots detects the change of parking states, it
33
sends the real-time sensing data to the parking info repository. Then, the data
synchronization processor updates the associated data in mirror database based
on parking info repository. The system dynamically updates the parking and
reservation information on the website according to the data stored in a mirror
database. The driver is able to obtain the real-time parking information from the
web server, as shown in Fig. 4.3. If the driver selects his/her desired parking lot,
s/he is able to reserve a parking space in the selected parking lot. After verifying
34
the driver’s identity in reservation authority, the system updates the reservation
information in the mirror database, and the driver receives the confirmation
information, as shown in Fig. 4.4.
35
Chapter 5
Evaluation
In order to investigate the parking guidance policies and the proposed RSP sys-
tem, we have to develop a simulator to import the real-world map and traffic
traces, simulate users’ parking behaviors and implement related parking strategies.
Specifically, we use Java 1.5 to develop the main components, including dynamic
pricing scheme, data access and iRev applications. For the data repository and
minor database, we use MySQL. And we use JSP to implement the web service by
using Apache Tomcat as the web environment. For the sensor program, we use
TinyOS and nesC to develop specific applications.
36
This simulator allows us to import a real-world map as the target area, and
acquires the information from the map, e.g., distance and paths. Given the map,
let G = ( N, A) be traffic network defined by a set N of nodes and a set A of edges,
where N and A represent the set of blocks and the set of roads connecting blocks.
With the parking map, we aggregate the parking lots in one block as a virtual
parking lot. Therefore, each node has a (virtual) parking lot attached, and an edge
has a specific value assigned to represent the distance between two blocks.
In the simulation, we use the real-world traffic traces to generate the parking
demand. Here the parking demand is the number of drivers who need parking
spaces in the target area. However, in reality, it is difficult to collect the traffic traces
for parking in the target area. Although the sensor network is deployed to monitor
the incoming and outgoing traffic for parking in individual parking lot [16], [8],
the traffic data from individual parking lot cannot represent the total traffic traces
for parking in the whole area. Fortunately, we can employ the highway traffic
traces to estimate traffic for parking, which are available from the Performance
Measurement System (PeMS) at the University of California, Berkeley. Here we
make a general assumption that real total traffic for parking is proportional to the
highway traffic. Although not all of traffic pursuing parking spaces in target area
are from highways, and not all highway traffic need to park in the target area, the
highway case can simulate the state of total traffic for parking. We classify the
total highway traffic into incoming traffic and outgoing traffic, which represent the
traffic approaching to and leaving from the target area. The incoming traffic serves
37
as the reference of parking demand. We use the driving distance within the target
area to measure the traffic for parking. For calculating the driving distance, the
vehicles begin to run the distance meters, once they enter the area, until reaching
the selected parking lot. Moreover, as we discuss in Section 3, we use congestion
factor l to represent the level of congestion condition. In the simulation, we use the
traffic load to simulate the congestion condition. For instance, if l = 1, the traffic
load is under normal condition. If l = 2, the traffic load is double the normal
condition.
In our simulation, we use the map of Los Angels Downtown as the target area, as
shown in Fig. 5.1, which is surrounded by the interstate highways, I-101, I-110, I-10
38
and I5. I-n this area, there are multiple typical districts including central business
district, residential district, entertainment venues, which is one of busy areas in
Los Angeles. This area is very representative in big cities. Furthermore, Fig. 5.2
illustrates the incoming and outgoing traffic in two different days. As we see, the
peak time of incoming traffic is from 6am to 10am, and the rush hour of outgoing
traffic is during 5pm to 8pm. It matches people’s regular schedule, in the morning
most people drive to work and go back home after 5pm. Therefore, the traffic trace
is reasonable to generate the parking demand in the simulation. Furthermore, we
assume that the users’ budget distribution follows the Gaussian distribution at a
certain range from 1 to 10. If the budget is less than 1, we force it to be 1, and if it
is larger than 10, we set it to 10.
39
Traffic on 05/01/09
10000
Number of vehicles
8000
6000
4000
2000
0
0 5 10 15 20 25
Time (hour)
Traffic on 02/16/09
9000
8000
7000
Number of vehicles
6000
5000
4000
3000
Incoming Traffic
2000 Outgoing Traffic
1000
0 5 10 15 20 25
Time (hour)
The following experimental results illustrate the efficacy and feasibility of the
proposed Reservation-based Smart Parking (RSP) system in a cost-effective way.
We evaluate the effectiveness of reservation policy and dynamic pricing scheme in
terms of following perspectives:
3.5
2.5
1.5
0 5 10 15 20 25
Time (hour)
Figure 5.3: Traffic Searching for Parking Comparison under Different Parking
Guidance Strategies
As we discuss in Chapter 2, Fig. 5.3 shows that the driving distance under
blind search is the worst, especially during the peak hours; PIS and BPIS are better
than blind search when traffic flows increase; and the reservation policy is the best
41
compared with others. Note that, in this simulation, there is no pricing scheme
implemented in reservation policy. An interesting observation of reservation
policy is that the average driving distance is decreasing at peak time, rather than
increasing. That is because, after users learn the states of parking lots, they tend to
reserve the nearest parking lot to their destination. During the peak hours, most
parking lots are almost fully occupied in central area. Consequently, users have
to select the parking lots in surrounding area, which are near to their start points.
Therefore, it results in the reduction of average driving distance during the peak
hours.
Related to the dynamic pricing scheme, fix-price policy is option for the service
1.88
Average Driving Distance (Mile)
1.86
1.84
1.82
1.8
1.78
1.76
1.74
0 5 10 15 20 25
Time (Hour)
Figure 5.4: Traffic Searching for Parking under Different Pricing Schemes
provide. In order to compare the traffic searching for parking under these two
42
5.3.2 Revenue
5
x 10
6
Total Revenue under Dynamic Pricing
Total Revenue under Fixed Pricing
5
4
Revenue (Dollar)
0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Price Unit (Dollar)
of all parking lots in the target area according to different pricing schemes imple-
mented in reservation-based policy. Note that the price unit means basic price for
dynamic pricing scheme, and unique fixed price for fixed pricing scheme. Depend-
ing on different price units, both kinds of pricing perform differently on revenue
growth. Compared to fixed pricing, the proposed dynamic pricing can improve
the revenue when the basic price is small. With the increasing of basic price, the
revenue under dynamic pricing becomes similar with fixed price. Although the
largest revenue is lower than fixed price (94.22%), dynamic pricing can let more
valuable users with lower budgets find their desirable parking spaces. Since the
users’ budget constraints are under Gaussian distribution, higher basic price will
cause more failure on parking searching and traffic congestion. Therefore, in real
world, low price is more feasible considering the social welfare, which allows more
users with lower budget get their parking spaces. In this case, the dynamic pricing
44
can achieve better revenue, because it can adjust parking price dynamically based
on parking condition, as well as let most users be satisfied.
Additionally, since setting the fixed price to obtain the most revenue is based the
5
x 10
4
Revenue (Dollar)
0
3 [1ï5] 5 [1ï10] 4 [3ï6]
Price Unit (Dollar)
Figure 5.6: Revenue Comparison between Dynamic and Random Selection of Fixed
Pricing
selection pricing, when the basic price is small. However, when the selection range
is small enough, the provider obtains similar revenue under random selection and
fixed price, but sacrifice the users’ satisfaction.
The results in this simulation indicate that the proposed dynamic pricing scheme
uses the real-time parking condition as users’ feedback, takes advantage of users’
differentiated needs for the improvement in revenue growth, as well as concerns
users’ satisfaction, relative to the fixed-price and random-price policies.
0.9
0.8
Users with budget $2
0.7 Users with budget $5
Users with budget $10
0.6
Failure Rate
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5
Congestion Factor
The proposed dynamic pricing scheme can guarantee the service differentiation,
even if the traffic congestion happens. In this simulation, we only implement the
46
dynamic-price scheme, keep the basic price at the default value (which is $1 for
per time slot), and vary the traffic load to check the failure rates of the users
with budget $2, budget $5 and budget $10. The failure rate here is defined as the
number of drivers who cannot find parking spaces versus the number of total
drivers. As shown in Fig. 5.7, all failure rates of these users is seen to increase
with the congestion factor, which is determined by traffic load in this simulation.
Initially, under the default basic price, all users can find their desired parking
spaces. With the load increasing, the failure rate of users with budget $2 soars
firstly, and then more users with budget $5 start to be unable to find parking spaces.
At the heavy load, the dramatic parking demand causes the higher failure rate of
users with budget $10. However, when the congestion happens, the dynamic-price
scheme can guarantee the quality of parking service for the users with higher
budgets, compared with the users with low budgets. Furthermore, by adjusting
the price dynamically, it stimulates users to moving to uncongested parking lots
via lower price to help balance the traffic load.
47
Chapter 6
6.1 Conclusion
6.2.1 Synchronization
In the proposed RSP system, sensing system is responsible for collecting parking
information periodically. Synchronization of the parking states in different parking
lots is required. Along this direction, the authors in literature [14] proposed a
fully localized diffusion-based method to achieve full scalability, and Jana et al [26]
introduced lightweight tree-based synchronization (LTS) algorithm to operate the
node failures. In the proposed system, the management system collects the parking
information from individual parking lots, and generates the parking guidance
signal (i.e., parking price). Hence, with the centralized management system, it is
trivial to achieve the clock-synchronization of the sensed data.
In the real world, it is impossible to make all of drivers adopt the proposed RSP
system at once. Increasing the deployability is an important concern. Fortunately,
by implementing the reservation policy and dynamic pricing scheme, the proposed
RSP system is in favor of the drivers using such system, when compared to users
without using the system. Hence, it provides enough incentive for drivers to adopt
the system.
Bibliography
[7] Murat Caliskan, Daniel Graupner, and Martin Mauve. Decentralized discovery
of free parking places. In Proc. of the Third ACM International Workshop on
Vehicular Ad Hoc Networks (VANET’06), 2006.
[9] Edmund M. Clark, Bruce Krogh, Andre Platzer, and Raj Rajkumar. Analysis
and veri cation challenges for cyberphysical transportation systems. In NI-
TRD National Workshop for Research on Transportation Cyber-Physical Systems:
Automotive, Aviation, and Rail, 2008.
[12] Alain L. Kornhauser. About prospect eleven and the DARPA project. J. Robot.
Syst., 23(9):745–753, 2006.
[13] I. Lee and O. Sokolsky. Medical cyber physical systems. In Design Automation
Conference (DAC 2010), 2010.
[14] Qun Li and Daniela Rus. Global clock synchronization in sensor networks. In
Proceedings of IEEE INFOCOM’04, 2004.
[16] Rongxing Lu, Xiaodong Lin, Haojin Zhu, and Xuemin (Sherman) Shen.
SPARK: A new VANET-based smart parking scheme for large parking lots.
In Proceedings of IEEE INFOCOM’07, 2007.
[17] Wenbo Mao. Modern Cryptography: Theory and Practice. Prentice Hall, 2003.
52
[21] Ragunathan (Raj) Rajkumar, Insup Lee, Lui Sha, and John Stankovic. Cyber-
physical systems: The next computing revolution. In Design Automation
Conference, 2010.
[22] Jake Reisdorff, Aldo Arizmendi, and Jason Armstrong. Parking lot detection
proposal.
[24] Susan A. Shaheen and Caroline J. Rodier. Smart parking management field
test: A bay area rapid transit (BART) district parking demonstration. UCD—
ITS—RR—05—02, 2005.
[25] Donald C. Shoup. Cruising for parking. Transport Policy, 13:479–486, 2006.
[26] Jana van Greunen and Jan Rabaey. Lightweight time synchronization for
sensor networks. In Proceeding ACM WSNA’03, 2003.
[28] Xin Wang and Henning Schulzrinne. Pricing network resources for adaptive
application. IEEE Transactions on Networking, 2005.
[29] Paul Steely White. No vacancy: Park slope’s parking problem. Transportation
alternatives, 2007. http://www.transalt.org/newsroom/releases/126.
[30] Wayne Wolf. The good news and the bad news. IEEE Computer,
10.1109/MC.2007.404, 2007.
[31] Daniel Work, Alexandre Bayen, and Quinn Jacobso. Automotive cyber phys-
ical systems in the context of human mobility. In National Workshop on
High-Confidence Automotive Cyber-Physical Systems, 2008.
[32] Daniel B. Work and Alexandre M. Bayen. Impacts of the mobile internet
on transportation cyberphysical systems: Traffic monitoring using smart-
phones. In National Workshop for Research on High-Confidence Transportation
Cyber-Physical Systems: Automotive, Aviation and Rail, 2008.