Scalable validation of automated bicycle and pedestrian counters: evidence from Washington, D.C.

• Developed a scalable method to validate automated bike and ped counters. • Found 12–15 manual hours are needed for reliable correction functions. • Validated counters had a 46% improvement in mean RMSE of automated counts. • Accuracy improves when validation is done during peak hours and non-rain conditions. • Seasonal effects differ for bicycle and pedestrian validation. Data from automated pedestrian and bicycle counters is important in planning for active transportation. Counter validation approaches vary, from spot checks at initial installation of individual counters to rigorous comparison with manual count data. Since best practices differ, the data validity from counters is often unknown. This study identifies (1) the minimum number of manual count hours needed to reliably validate automated counters and (2) key factors affecting the accuracy of correction functions. Findings suggest that using 12–15 hours of count data to validate automated counters is the point of diminishing returns to develop reliable correction functions across site volumes. Counters that passed our validation criteria were associated with a 46% decrease in mean RMSE. For bicycle counters, greater accuracy was associated with validation on warmer, non-summer days, during peak hours, and with no precipitation. For pedestrian counters, higher accuracy was associated with validation during summer, spring, or early winter with no precipitation.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives
Published
2025-10-04
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trip.2025.101661
Primary Topic
Urban Transport and Accessibility
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Scalable validation of automated bicycle and pedestrian counters: evidence from Washington, D.C.

Sarah Worth O’Brien, Ralph Buehler, Steve Hankey, Krista Nordback et al.
Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives
Urban Transport and Accessibility
article

Scalable validation of automated bicycle and pedestrian counters: evidence from Washington, D.C.

Sarah Worth O’Brien, Ralph Buehler, Steve Hankey, Krista Nordback, Md Shazalal Tushar, Vahid Bakhshi, Sarah Bayldon
article en

Abstract

• Developed a scalable method to validate automated bike and ped counters. • Found 12–15 manual hours are needed for reliable correction functions. • Validated counters had a 46% improvement in mean RMSE of automated counts. • Accuracy improves when validation is done during peak hours and non-rain conditions. • Seasonal effects differ for bicycle and pedestrian validation. Data from automated pedestrian and bicycle counters is important in planning for active transportation. Counter validation approaches vary, from spot checks at initial installation of individual counters to rigorous comparison with manual count data. Since best practices differ, the data validity from counters is often unknown. This study identifies (1) the minimum number of manual count hours needed to reliably validate automated counters and (2) key factors affecting the accuracy of correction functions. Findings suggest that using 12–15 hours of count data to validate automated counters is the point of diminishing returns to develop reliable correction functions across site volumes. Counters that passed our validation criteria were associated with a 46% decrease in mean RMSE. For bicycle counters, greater accuracy was associated with validation on warmer, non-summer days, during peak hours, and with no precipitation. For pedestrian counters, higher accuracy was associated with validation during summer, spring, or early winter with no precipitation.

Transportation Research Interdisciplinary PerspectivesVol. 34
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (US), Office of International Affairs (US), Virginia Tech (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 72%
Urban Transport and Accessibility
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Scalable validation of automated bicycle and pedestrian counters: evidence from Washington, D.C. — Sarah Worth O’Brien, Ralph Buehler, et al. · Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS