Green Open-Access
Filtern
Volltext vorhanden
- nein (2)
Dokumenttyp
- Wissenschaftlicher Artikel (1)
- Sonstiges (1)
Sprache
- Englisch (2)
Gehört zur Bibliographie
- ja (2)
Schlagworte
- Parking search (1)
- constrained optimization (1)
- field study (1)
- probabilistic routing (1)
Institut
For the last ten years, almost every theoretical result concerning the expected run time of a randomized search heuristic used drift theory, making it the arguably most important tool in this domain. Its success is due to its ease of use and its powerful result: drift theory allows the user to derive bounds on the expected first-hitting time of a random process by bounding expected local changes of the process - the drift. This is usually far easier than bounding the expected first-hitting time directly. Due to the widespread use of drift theory, it is of utmost importance to have the best drift theorems possible. We improve the fundamental additive, multiplicative, and variable drift theorems by stating them in a form as general as possible and providing examples of why the restrictions we keep are still necessary. Our additive drift theorem for upper bounds only requires the process to be nonnegative, that is, we remove unnecessary restrictions like a finite, discrete, or bounded search space. As corollaries, the same is true for our upper bounds in the case of variable and multiplicative drift.
A significant percentage of urban traffic is caused by the search for parking spots. One possible approach to improve this situation is to guide drivers along routes which are likely to have free parking spots. The task of finding such a route can be modeled as a probabilistic graph problem which is NP-complete. Thus, we propose heuristic approaches for solving this problem and evaluate them experimentally. For this, we use probabilities of finding a parking spot, which are based on publicly available empirical data from TomTom International B.V. Additionally, we propose a heuristic that relies exclusively on conventional road attributes. Our experiments show that this algorithm comes close to the baseline by a factor of 1.3 in our cost measure. Last, we complement our experiments with results from a field study, comparing the success rates of our algorithms against real human drivers.