Resolve conflicts between traditional data sources by using archived data.

Results from the Planning for Operations Case Study from the Metropolitan Transportation Commission in San Francisco California

September 2009
San Francisco,California,United States

Background (Show)

Lesson Learned

In corridors where there were multiple data sets available for analysis, in the case of conflicting data, staff took a look at historical Performance Monitoring System (PeMS) data in order to determine which data source was most likely correct for that given day or time. This process required qualified staff who were able to effectively mine the data and determine the accuracy of the data received from the sensors. If the data were not analyzed, assessed for reasonableness, and compared against other sources, or if the data had been misinterpreted, the conclusions from the analysis could be unreliable.

Unreliable or nonexistent detector data had to be imputed based on nearby detectors and historical data. However, this method is only effective if the defective sensors are distributed across the system and not in clusters. Otherwise, the imputation would cause inaccurate results.

Lesson Comments

No comments posted to date

Comment on this Lesson

To comment on this lesson, fill in the information below and click on submit. An asterisk (*) indicates a required field. Your name and email address, if provided, will not be posted, but are to contact you, if needed to clarify your comments.


Applying Analysis Tools in Planning for Operations: Case Study #3 – Using Archived Data As a Tool for Operations Planning

Author: Lin Zhang and Krista Jeannotte, Cambridge Systematics

Published By: U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration,

Source Date: September 2009

Other Reference Number: FHWA-HOP-10-004

URL: http://www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/fhwahop10004/fhwahop10004.pdf

Lesson Contacts

No contact information available


Average User Rating

0 ( ratings)

Rate this Lesson

(click stars to rate)

Lesson ID: 2011-00584