Traffic surveillance method and system

[0022] First, the invention preferably comprises a method wherein video recordings are recorded on video tape or a hard disk at a predetermined location, such as an intersection, and wherein the recording is reviewed manually to count the number of traffic events that occur at that location, but unlike previous methods, the present invention contemplates reviewing the recordings in a remote location, by a counter in a foreign country, where labor is relatively inexpensive. That is, although the recording of the video can take place on location in real time, much like in past systems, the recording is preferably sent to a remote location where it can be reviewed carefully and methodically, by technicians and operators that can work at a reduced cost, relative to the country where the recordings are made. This enables additional time to be spent reviewing, counting and summarizing the information, and making sure the information and data are accurately recorded. And, because of the lower labor costs involved, there will be less pressure on counters to work faster, wherein the counters will be more likely to stop the recording when necessary, and / or re-review the recording to make sure the count is correct, which can help overcome the deficiencies of past systems. In the preferred embodiment, two individual counters are used to review each recording, wherein the results of the counting can then be analyzed and compared by a supervisor to better ensure accuracy of the count.

[0031] This apparatus preferably enables the video camera to be set up quickly and economically at virtually any location, regardless of whether there is a building or pole on which to mount the camera already in existence, and regardless of the size of the intersection. This gives the traffic surveillance team more flexibility in setting up the video camera in locations that are optimum for viewing accuracy and clarity, thereby helping to ensure better data. The height of the camera can also be adjusted depending on the type of vehicles that are expected to pass.

The above methods suffer from the same three basic limitations, as follows:

Very often, the labeling of the forms and boards is incomplete or inaccurate.

An equally serious limitation is the potential for human error made by the counter.

Because the counts are performed in real time, there is no way to slow down the counting or correct any errors.

If several vehicles enter the intersection at the same time, for example, the counter may not be able to keep up.

Moreover, the counter may get confused and end up hitting the wrong button, or make a mark in the wrong box.

Also, because counting personnel are not usually directly supervised during most of the survey period, they may take unauthorized breaks, and / or fill in forms with invented numbers.

Lack of Credibility.

There are frequent and significant errors because of the two inherent limitations described above.

Further, because conclusions of traffic studies are largely dependent on data, many who review traffic studies believe (often justifiably) that the underlying traffic counts are not accurate or were forged in some way.

If the counts are conducted in real time and cannot be replicated, there is no way for users of the data to prove or disprove the outcome of a particular count.

While the electronic boards make it somewhat easier to count vehicles and also facilitate data processing, they do not solve the basic problem of real-time counts.

Counters can still make mistakes, and there is no way to correct them or verify the results.

The main problem with past video recording methods, however, is that they are extremely labor intensive and therefore costly.

Because traffic counts are a relatively low-budget item, video recordings have thus far only been economically feasible for specialized research studies.

Another problem is the difficulty of obtaining clearly observable videos.

In many cases, it is more difficult to identify individual vehicles on videotape than it is from direct observation.

For example, large trucks and buses can block the observer's view.

These systems, however, are not yet very reliable in terms of being able to accurately record the various movements that a vehicle can make through an intersection, including turns.

They are also not good at accurately recording the type of vehicle that passes through, and other aspects, like pedestrian counts, etc.