Comparative analysis of traffic state estimation ─ Cumulative counts-based and trajectory-based methods

The Macroscopic Fundamental Diagram (MFD) relates space-mean density and flow. Since the MFD represents the area-wide network traffic performance, studies on perimeter control strategies and network-wide traffic state estimation utilising the MFD concept have been reported. Most previous works have utilised data from fixed sensors, such as inductive loops, to estimate the MFD, which can cause biased estimation in urban networks due to queue spillovers at intersections. To overcome the limitation, recent literature reports the use of trajectory data obtained from probe vehicles. However, these studies have been conducted using simulated datasets; limited works have discussed the limitations of real datasets and their impact on the variable estimation. This study compares two methods for estimating traffic state variables of signalised arterial sections: a method based on cumulative vehicle counts (CUPRITE), and one based on vehicles’ trajectory from taxi Global Positioning System (GPS) log. The comparisons reveal some characteristics of taxi trajectory data available in Brisbane, Australia. The current trajectory data have limitations in quantity (i.e., the penetration rate), due to which the traffic state variables tend to be underestimated. Nevertheless, the trajectory-based method successfully captures the features of traffic states, which suggests that the trajectories from taxis can be a good estimator for the network-wide traffic states.

Evaluation of Australian Performing Arts Market 2014-2018 REPORT TWO APAM inter-year report 2015 DECEMBER

The report follows up on data and trends tabled in August 2015 that collected data from two key sources – six identified case study productions that have been tracked for eighteen months, and an online survey delivered to all APAM 2014 delegates. The comparative report has been constructed through an analysis of data reported from the August 2015 and the most recent online survey to all 2104 PM delegates conducted in late November 2015. The report highlights six key trends emerging from the data: The majority of survey respondents will return to APAM 2016; The central reason for attending is the networking opportunities the Market affords; Respondents are confident that a range of new relationships forged at the Market will afford long-term interest and buying opportunities and that as a result of the 2014 event, real touring outcomes were realised for some respondents; Respondents would like to see greater attention to a greater number of networking activities within the program to enable touring outcomes; The multi-venue model is still of concern, and is a recurrent issue from earlier surveys; The level of expense incurred by producers to present work at APAM. Throughout the report, extracted data from the online survey responses will be tabled to develop a narrative in response to the key research aims outlined in the Brisbane Powerhouse Tender document (2011). A full version of the collated responses to the survey questions can be found in the appendices of the report.

Now the real international fight begins for the Trans-Pacific Partnership

In Atlanta, the trade ministers of a dozen countries across the Pacific Rim announced that they had successfully reached a concluded agreement upon the Trans-Pacific Partnership. The debate over the TPP will now play out in legislatures across the Pacific Rim, where sentiment towards the deal is much more mixed. The ministers insisted: “After more than five years of intensive negotiations, we have come to an agreement that will support jobs, drive sustainable growth, foster inclusive development, and promote innovation across the Asia-Pacific region … The agreement achieves the goal we set forth of an ambitious, comprehensive, high standard and balanced agreement that will benefit our nation’s citizens … We expect this historic agreement to promote economic growth, support higher-paying jobs; enhance innovation, productivity and competitiveness; raise living standards; reduce poverty in our countries; and to promote transparency, good governance, and strong labor and environmental protections.” But there has been fierce criticism of the Trans-Pacific Partnership, because of both its secrecy and its substance. Nobel Laureate Professor Joseph Stiglitz has warned that the agreement is not about free trade, but about the protection of corporate monopolies. The intellectual property chapter provides for longer and stronger protection of intellectual property rights. The investment chapter provides foreign investors with the power to challenge governments under an investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) regime. The environment chapter is weak and toothless, and seems to be little more than an exercise in greenwashing. The health annex — and many other parts of the agreement — strengthen the power of pharmaceutical companies and biotechnology developers. The text on state-owned enterprises raises concerns about public ownership of postal services, broadcasters and national broadband services.