[HN Gopher] No GPS required: our app can now locate underground ...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       No GPS required: our app can now locate underground trains
        
       Author : dotcoma
       Score  : 892 points
       Date   : 2024-11-13 01:46 UTC (21 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (blog.transitapp.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (blog.transitapp.com)
        
       | mdergosits wrote:
       | Some cities will put BLE beacons in tunnels that transmit the
       | location and then you can find your location via the strongest
       | beacon signal. This seems like a nice way to figure that out
       | without installing hardware!
        
         | IshKebab wrote:
         | Some trains even have modern technology called "screens" that
         | display their current location, next stop, route and so on!
         | 
         | (Although in fairness they so often get this laughably wrong,
         | and cycle through useless "remember your luggage" style
         | messages so you have to wait like 20s to see the information
         | you want - critically bad on a train.)
        
           | the_mitsuhiko wrote:
           | I really don't understand why not every subway shows the next
           | station on the screen instead of warning messages and other
           | stuff. (And a marker for side the doors will open)
        
             | dietr1ch wrote:
             | I don't get why ads are prioritised over travel
             | information.
        
               | eythian wrote:
               | For at least months in my city, the screens in buses have
               | been showing a "broken image" icon as part of their ad
               | cycle. I'd much rather know about the next stop.
        
               | kdmccormick wrote:
               | It's very simple: Transit in many places is underfunded.
               | Travel info screens cost money to install and maintain.
               | Ads, on the other hand, make money.
        
               | bluGill wrote:
               | Ads make money, but not that much. I'm not convinced they
               | are enough to be worth the bother. To have ads you need
               | to pay people in sales to sell them, people to install
               | them (now that this is electronic it is easier than the
               | old paper days, but you need a more expensive tech person
               | to keep them working). At best they are 5% of your gross
               | budget, so not very significant and they often hard
               | harmful to your riders.
        
               | rtkwe wrote:
               | Transit in the US seems to be constantly on a starvation
               | diet budgetarily speaking so I'm not shocked small sums
               | of money get chosen over options that would be better for
               | their users.
        
               | rangestransform wrote:
               | Starvation diet? You should see how much NYC MTA spends,
               | it's a feast compared to even the rest of the anglosphere
        
               | rtkwe wrote:
               | The MTA is a huge outlier but still gets less money for
               | upgrades and upkeep than they need. They limped along for
               | years on extremely outdated train tracking infrastructure
               | and are just getting around to doing updates that needed
               | to be started two decades ago.
        
               | rangestransform wrote:
               | They get way more than they need, it's just burnt on
               | unions, pensions, and consultants
               | 
               | I will literally volunteer my time to canvass for anyone
               | who runs on busting NYC public sector unions
        
               | akadruid1 wrote:
               | 5% of a transit authority's budget would be a lot of
               | money! Advertising made PS158 million for Transport for
               | London in 2019, much less than 5% of their budget.
        
               | bigfatkitten wrote:
               | What often happen is a a company comes into install and
               | maintain the displays for "free", on the proviso that
               | they can display ads and keep most/all of the ad money.
        
               | dietr1ch wrote:
               | Ads just make money out of people, why not cut off the
               | middleman?
        
             | IshKebab wrote:
             | I assume it's because the person deciding what goes on the
             | screens is some manager somewhere. They probably just don't
             | really thing about it.
        
           | IncreasePosts wrote:
           | Also doesn't help travelers who aren't too familiar with
           | English - I always wonder how many NY-bound tourists have
           | stepped off the train at "Newark Penn Station".
        
           | SoftTalker wrote:
           | Even better, they have a thing called a "window" which is
           | transparent and you can look out on the platform and see the
           | sign posting the station name.
        
           | spaceywilly wrote:
           | I take the train every day in NYC. Around half the time the
           | train is brand new and has nice displays that even show you
           | where the stairs are located in each station as you pull up.
           | The other half the train is from the 1960s and has no
           | information whatsoever. So yeah this app will definitely be
           | an upgrade over peering out the window to read the station
           | names. Even the trains with displays are occasionally
           | wrong/not working.
        
       | scottbez1 wrote:
       | This is super cool! As a regular BART commuter I always thought
       | it'd be fun to try and build a location classifier based on the
       | screeches in different tunnel locations, but using accelerometer
       | data is probably much more practical.
        
         | sitkack wrote:
         | Tune the screeches so they make a different chord for each
         | stop.
        
           | Lance_ET_Compte wrote:
           | I have no hearing in any of the frequencies BART trains emit.
           | Burned away...
           | 
           | I do love this "Transit" app though.
        
             | sitkack wrote:
             | I am sorry for your loss, but does this explain dubstep?
        
         | ant6n wrote:
         | Using the microphone as a sensor is a bit of a no-go a transit
         | app. You could just record the noise of the train rolling to
         | find out the movement, but your users will suspect you are
         | listening to them.
        
       | isaacfrond wrote:
       | Anybody know what model architectures they used?
       | 
       | The motion detection might be a convolutional network or an svm.
       | The mixer model perhaps a classic neural network.
        
         | iAkashPaul wrote:
         | Could be that or an RNN/LSTM as well
        
       | mjamesaustin wrote:
       | This is one of the best apps I've ever used, and I'm excited to
       | see it's only getting better!
        
       | fullofstack wrote:
       | Is GPS spoofing an option, underground? Would instantly work on
       | all phones.
        
         | dietr1ch wrote:
         | Is it spoofing if you are telling the truth? Just pretend to be
         | a GPS satellite during its morning commute.
        
           | szszrk wrote:
           | Well, you are not a GPS satellite, so you are indeed spoofing
           | military equipment.
           | 
           | On a serious note, I recall that smartphone location in metro
           | in my city started to "just work" as soon as all stations and
           | tunnels had indoor cell towers. Suddenly all apps worked fine
           | and I forgot that problem ever existed.
           | 
           | Modern location detection is as scary as it is amazing.
        
             | bluGill wrote:
             | Cell towers also transmit location data
        
           | _flux wrote:
           | You'd need to spoof at least three satellites to get a fix,
           | right? And then you'd need to spoof different signals for
           | different regions of the subway, because your signal sources
           | aren't really in the orbit.
           | 
           | Sounds to me this could be very complicated and expensive. I
           | wonder if it would even be possible because you'd need to
           | have the same signal spoof the correct positions to everyone
           | who hears that signal.
        
             | dietr1ch wrote:
             | No, you need 3 satellites because they are far enough that
             | their position and time gives you too much uncertainty.
             | 
             | If the entire sphere where I could be fits within 5m I
             | guess I don't need other satellites and their time to start
             | intersecting spheres.
        
               | _flux wrote:
               | I don't understand this. As far as I know, the satellite
               | basically sends its identifier and precise time, and from
               | this information (combined with the information in GPS
               | calendar that tells the locations of the satellites) the
               | recipient can determines its own location.
               | 
               | How could it be possible to determine the location from a
               | single timestamp and information about which satellite it
               | belongs to? I suppose if the recipient already has a fix,
               | then it could perhaps survive with less than 3 satellites
               | by making some assumptions, but I imagine this will
               | result in lower quality location information.
               | 
               | Were you proposing to assume the location of a 5m sphere
               | the recipient is in?
        
               | bluGill wrote:
               | The satellite also sends information about all the other
               | satellites that a receiver should be able to see. This is
               | what makes adding other transmitters hard/impossible I
               | guess - no way to tell the overhead satellites that your
               | ground station also exists (there would presumably be
               | thousands of them - most not in range of your receiver
               | which would be even more problems.)
        
               | dietr1ch wrote:
               | > I don't understand this. As far as I know, the
               | satellite basically sends its identifier and precise
               | time, and from this information (combined with the
               | information in GPS calendar that tells the locations of
               | the satellites) the recipient can determines its own
               | location.
               | 
               | I'd assumed the GPS calendar was somehow broadcasted by
               | the GPS network too, which kind of means that they also
               | share their location.
               | 
               | > Were you proposing to assume the location of a 5m
               | sphere the recipient is in?
               | 
               | I guess the proposal was to change the problem from
               | pinpoint a single point in space, to figure out roughly
               | where I am, in which case being anywhere in a tiny sphere
               | is pretty much the same as being in a point after you
               | account for errors.
        
         | jillesvangurp wrote:
         | No need; phones use sensor fusion these days. Wifi, ble, 4G/5G
         | base stations, signals, etc. it's all taken into account. Which
         | is why you can get accurate position in a lot of places where
         | you definitely don't have any line of sight to any GPS
         | satellites. Some of the more recent wifi standards also have
         | some positioning features.
        
           | cryptoz wrote:
           | Early Android dev had a guide on how devs could pick the best
           | location from various sources individually, and it was
           | massive pain with dubious results.
        
         | qwertox wrote:
         | Having the train use Bluetooth Low Energy advertising to
         | broadcast its location and some other data, like time-to-next
         | station, next station name, would be a nice feature.
         | 
         | GPS spoofing should not be done in my opinion until the
         | negative side-effects are well understood.
        
           | flemhans wrote:
           | Ona similar note I always thought it would be cool if there
           | was a standard allowing (trusted) WiFi access points to relay
           | location data, so that in-flight WiFi could pass on the
           | plane's GPS feed.
        
           | h1fra wrote:
           | This is the case in some stations in Paris. To retrofit
           | ancient trains with station announcements, they have
           | installed Bluetooth broadcasters on each station so the train
           | can detect when it enters/leaves and announce the next
           | station for visually impaired people. Smart and simple imo.
           | 
           | https://www.leparisien.fr/info-paris-ile-de-france-
           | oise/tran...
        
             | immibis wrote:
             | Not balises?
        
           | gield wrote:
           | Waze Beacons [1] do this for car tunnels. Some underground
           | systems, e.g. in Barcelona IIRC, also use BLE beacons to help
           | phones position themselves.
           | 
           | [1] https://support.google.com/waze/partners/answer/9416071
        
         | RobotToaster wrote:
         | Would it be necessary? I thought there was a standard for
         | ground based augmentation of GPS?
        
       | dietr1ch wrote:
       | This is really cool.
       | 
       | Sort of related, what I find kind of silly, is that my car
       | probably knows really well where I am, but can't help my phone
       | figure out where my car is pointing to despite being connected to
       | it.
        
         | MaxikCZ wrote:
         | Thats still surprisingly unsolved problem. I was daydreaming
         | about pulling my laptop out somewhere without known wifi and it
         | automatically using my phone as a hotspot, without going trough
         | manual process of enabling said hotspot. Somehow we connected
         | the world but forgot to connect out devices..
        
           | vineyardmike wrote:
           | This has almost been a feature for Macs+iPhones for like a
           | decade. You need to manually "pick a wifi network" but it'll
           | turn on your phone's hotspot if you pick it from the list.
        
             | pjerem wrote:
             | Never tried on my Mac, but on iPad, it's totally automatic
             | : the iPad automatically tells the iPhone to enable the
             | hotspot (over Bluetooth I presume) then connects to it.
        
             | wisenull wrote:
             | Is the hotspot truly off? I am asking because it was really
             | common to see Whoever's iPhone whenever you were picking a
             | wifi network.
        
               | astrange wrote:
               | The hotspot uses a lot of power, so it really is off when
               | it's not being used.
        
         | klausa wrote:
         | My understanding of CarPlay is that it does offload GPS to the
         | car (when available, not all units/manufacturers might support
         | it).
        
           | fragmede wrote:
           | It does! Unfortunately for me, I rented this one Ford
           | Explorer where the car's GPS was off by a mile, so that was
           | the opposite of helpful, and I didn't find a way to turn that
           | off in the short time I had it.
        
           | longtimelistnr wrote:
           | This is actually a problem for my Volkswagen Tiguan, the car
           | GPS data is wildly inaccurate probably ~30% of the time. The
           | only fix is force it to use wired CarPlay or turn of CarPlay
           | and let my map grab my phone's data before reconnecting.
        
         | porphyra wrote:
         | This is one thing that is nice about using the Tesla in-car
         | navigation. It always knows which way the car is pointed.
        
       | __MatrixMan__ wrote:
       | Oh thank goodness. I knew I buried a train _somewhere_ around
       | here but I just can 't find it.
        
         | aziaziazi wrote:
         | Lets be the bad guy today:
         | 
         | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7695956
        
           | ThePowerOfFuet wrote:
           | That says "Please don't post substanceless one-liners here."
           | 
           | The joke was _two_ sentences, and I, for one, appreciated it.
           | 
           | If you're going to quote regulations, make sure to bring a
           | gun to a gun fight!
        
             | aziaziazi wrote:
             | Well I think "one-liner" here adds more weight to
             | "substanceless" and was not indented to be taken literally:
             | 
             | - it has no useful meaning in a media you can resize.
             | 
             | - adding dots (.) does not noticeably change the meaning,
             | you could replace with a comma : "Oh thanks goodness, I
             | new...", allowing _cheating_ on the _fight rules_. I don't
             | think that's desirable way we want to interact as a HN-
             | user-community (personal opinion)
             | 
             | - taking the literal read anyway, I see one line and two
             | sentences right now. It's a one liner. (not English native,
             | may I missed a secondary meaning?)
             | 
             | Dang clarify it bellow the post in linked and cite scott_s,
             | none of which talking about the length of the joke but both
             | referring to noise.
             | 
             | I personally also found it funny BUT I also saw like 10
             | substanceless not-so-funny jokes today on HN. INHM problem
             | is not the joke itself but the emptiness of the post if you
             | take the joke aside.
        
           | blitzar wrote:
           | Be kind. Don't be snarky.
           | 
           | Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of
           | what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to
           | criticize. Assume good faith.
           | 
           | Please don't post shallow dismissals, especially of other
           | people's work. A good critical comment teaches us something.
           | 
           | Please don't complain about tangential annoyances--e.g.
           | article or website formats, name collisions, or back-button
           | breakage. They're too common to be interesting.
           | 
           | https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
        
             | aziaziazi wrote:
             | Thanks for sharing those other guidelines.
             | 
             | Some could feel my comment escape them from it's tone and
             | it will be wonderful if you or someone else share a better
             | way to say what I said. I'm doing my best to not hurt
             | others, which sometimes is seen as coldness. Which I admit
             | is not kind.
        
               | blitzar wrote:
               | I can offer no better words for you, however can offer
               | advice which I myself shall no heed.
               | 
               | Vote accordingly and proceed onward. If collectively a
               | negligible fraction also do the same then the results
               | might just surprise. Ostracism is a powerful tool, while
               | not always used for good, it does serve a purpose in
               | society.
        
               | aziaziazi wrote:
               | Thanks, that is an idea I didn't have and worth
               | considering. Exclusion traumatized me in the past and
               | that still haunts everyday. I didn't thought it can be
               | used for good.
        
       | aeternum wrote:
       | Why does the acceleration graph not take direction into account?
       | Seems like you could get much cleaner data if you looked only at
       | the directions orthogonal to gravity.
        
         | kaonwarb wrote:
         | They're using Fourier transforms to focus on frequencies of
         | acceleration associated with subway travel; gravity should
         | mostly fall out as an independent factor.
        
         | nickmooney wrote:
         | Is there always a great reference for which way down is, given
         | that the phone can be in various orientations? You might have
         | to do some other heuristics / build some other model for that
         | to figure out which axis to subtract your 9.8 m/s^2 from -
         | maybe it's easier not to worry about it.
        
           | zokier wrote:
           | Isn't merging gyro data with accelerometer data pretty
           | standard approach?
        
       | grav wrote:
       | Very impressive. Also interesting that the motion type prediction
       | ("is this a moving train?") generalizes to underground trains in
       | other cities.
       | 
       | I see they support the the largest cities in Sweden and Norway,
       | wonder if there are any plans for Copenhagen, Denmark?
        
         | dotcoma wrote:
         | Let them know you'd like CPH !
         | 
         | Especially if you know someone at the transit agency or can
         | help them even in a very small way.
        
         | O-stevns wrote:
         | While I understand your question is about the Transit app in
         | general, I'd just like to mention in correlation to the article
         | that my team and I worked with one of the public transport
         | operators in Denmark, to utilize the motion predictability
         | feature found in Android and iOS SDK's, so I can enlighten you
         | with some details regarding that.
         | 
         | Our conclusion was that the feature didn't work in the danish
         | metros for reasons we never got to deep dive into. It's most
         | likely related to the fact that many of the metro stations are
         | built in concrete, as such there's no GPS data in most of them
         | unless you're very close to or on the surface and no motion
         | data.
         | 
         | I'd be surprised if they got this particular feature working
         | but who knows... maybe if we had looked into the raw sensor
         | output we might have been able to work something out.
         | 
         | In the end we made a solution to help determine when you're
         | moving or not by utilizing beacons.
        
       | modeless wrote:
       | Seems like you could do a better job of tracking progress between
       | stations by detecting the specific acceleration signature of each
       | segment of track. At least for tracks that are not completely
       | straight and level. Somewhat similar to the first primitive in-
       | car navigation systems before GPS, that worked on dead reckoning
       | with drift correction by matching the shape of the measured path
       | to map data.
        
         | fire_lake wrote:
         | Shazam for train tracks
        
           | modeless wrote:
           | Now accepting funding offers at $10m post-money valuation cap
        
             | blitzar wrote:
             | Ai Powered Shazam for train tracks.
             | 
             | Now accepting funding offers at $500m post-money valuation
             | cap.
        
               | rvnx wrote:
               | Then in 5 years: "Turns out this was marketing for
               | investors and that our classifier was using 99% of the
               | time last location and itinerary as primary factor to
               | determine location"
               | 
               | The magic formula: "if is_train_moving, countdown to next
               | station"
        
         | nuccy wrote:
         | Acceleration signature depends on:
         | 
         | - human driver
         | 
         | - train capacity and current load
         | 
         | - train model (or any powertrain variations)
         | 
         | More reliable might be to check rail track features from
         | accelerometer: tilt, turns, bumps, or a combinations of
         | everything. Even sounds on turns, changes of backround during
         | merging tunnels, etc. Integrated acceleration gives train
         | speed, which is also useful along with other inputs.
        
           | modeless wrote:
           | Yes, tilt, turns, and bumps are what I meant by
           | accelerations, not just the train's forward acceleration.
        
             | sakjur wrote:
             | If you're not putting the phone on the floor, wouldn't the
             | person holding it introduce a randomness factor that would
             | make it much harder to reliably measure those? And then
             | there's sun curves, packed leaves, ice and the cars'
             | suspension.
             | 
             | I think I'd struggle with finding a signal through all that
             | noise.
        
               | Normal_gaussian wrote:
               | Ive seen two seperate demos of doing this for the london
               | underground based purely on the accelerometer.
               | 
               | Accuracy is poor when blind, but if you have any info
               | about where the user last had a location fix it became
               | very good.
               | 
               | Neither company found sufficient interest to deploy the
               | sensor.
        
               | TeMPOraL wrote:
               | Contribution from the phone being held should be easy to
               | cancel out for the most part, as high frequency noise. It
               | of course gets much easier if you have acceleration data
               | from two or more devices held by different people.
        
           | sofixa wrote:
           | > human driver
           | 
           | Not in any even remotely modern system that will have a high
           | degree of automation and if there's a driver, they're only
           | closing and opening doors, and telling the train to get
           | going.
        
             | AndrewSwift wrote:
             | I just took a one day initiation with the SNCF for driving
             | trains in France.
             | 
             | I assumed that everything would be automated but in fact
             | nothing is.
             | 
             | They explained that they regularly face situations that
             | require human intervention (several times a day), and that
             | even a little automation would reduce the level of
             | attention on the part of the conductor.
             | 
             | The conductor is required to interact with the controls at
             | least every 30 seconds to avoid setting off alarms.
        
               | maeln wrote:
               | The SNCF is for regional and national train (with the
               | exception of the RER) where the possibility of having a
               | cow coming on the rail is non-negligible ... or a hot air
               | ballon landing on the rail and stopping the Nantes-Paris
               | lines for a whole morning :D .
               | 
               | So I think it is a much, much harder environment to
               | automate. Paris do have some metro line that are fully
               | automatic (line 1 at least) and both Rennes metro lines
               | are fully automatic. It is much easier to control the
               | environment around a metro and ensure that nothing can go
               | on the rails, and have surveillance system to check if,
               | if it does happen, it is detected ASAP.
        
               | rossant wrote:
               | Paris metro lines 1, 4, and 14 are automatic at the
               | moment.
        
               | sofixa wrote:
               | > The SNCF is for regional and national train (with the
               | exception of the RER) where the possibility of having a
               | cow coming on the rail is non-negligible ... or a hot air
               | ballon landing on the rail and stopping the Nantes-Paris
               | lines for a whole morning :D .
               | 
               | Or camels: https://www.francetvinfo.fr/animaux/un-
               | dromadaire-apercu-aux...
               | 
               | > So I think it is a much, much harder environment to
               | automate. Paris do have some metro line that are fully
               | automatic (line 1 at least) and both Rennes metro lines
               | are fully automatic. It is much easier to control the
               | environment around a metro and ensure that nothing can go
               | on the rails, and have surveillance system to check if,
               | if it does happen, it is detected ASAP.
               | 
               | Even the non-fully automatic lines use heavy automation
               | (e.g. lines such as 2, 3, 5, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12, 13).
        
               | Lance_ET_Compte wrote:
               | "Leaves on the line."
               | 
               | https://www.networkrail.co.uk/running-the-
               | railway/looking-af...
        
             | lpribis wrote:
             | Not true for a lot of (widely used) systems. Both the NY
             | subway and London Underground are manually driven for the
             | majority of lines.
        
               | ThePowerOfFuet wrote:
               | The comment to which you replied specifically said "Not
               | in any even remotely modern system"; neither of those are
               | remotely modern, _especially_ not NYC. Only two or three
               | lines of the famed Paris system would qualify.
               | 
               | Barcelona, on the other hand, would qualify for
               | everything except line 4.
        
               | lmm wrote:
               | Every London Underground line built after 1906 is
               | automatically driven - the human driver just pushes a
               | button and the train drives itself to the next station.
        
               | iggldiggl wrote:
               | That makes it sound as if they'd been automated right
               | from 1907, which most definitely isn't the case - on most
               | line automation only happened very recently. (The
               | Victoria Line was automated right from its opening in
               | 1968, then the Central line was automated in the 90s, the
               | Jubilee and Northern lines in the 2010s and the
               | subsurface network is currently under way.)
               | 
               | Also if we want to quibble, at least a few sections of
               | the Bakerloo and Piccadilly lines (which are still
               | completely manually driven) were opened _after_ 1906.
        
               | sofixa wrote:
               | London Undeground has high degree of automation (driver
               | presses a button, train drives itself optimally to the
               | next station).
               | 
               | Paris has the same, and also a number of lines (1, 4, 14,
               | and soon 15) which have no driver at all.
               | 
               | NYC Subway is an outlier in how obsolete everything is.
        
               | rangestransform wrote:
               | The NYC train drivers union continue to fight against one
               | person train operation and automation, to them the subway
               | is more of a jobs program than transportation
        
               | sofixa wrote:
               | I saw that, I saw trains with more than one MTA person
               | onboard, and saw some construction work which had 30
               | workers sitting on their phones and 2 working (passed by
               | multiple times that day, the ration never changed).
               | 
               | Grand Paris Express' president also talked about this,
               | and compared the 2nd avenue subway to the Grand Paris
               | Express (well, one cost $4.45 billion for 1.8 mi / 2.9 km
               | and 4 stations; the first line of GPE, 15 south is 33km,
               | 16 stations, and costs ~8 billion euros so it's a really
               | bad comparison), and has said that if he had to do things
               | the way the MTA do it, GPE would have gone nowhere.
        
               | rangestransform wrote:
               | I will literally volunteer to canvass for anyone who runs
               | on busting NYC public sector unions
        
               | porphyra wrote:
               | We should automate the trains and repurpose the train
               | staff to be conductors patrolling the trains to assist
               | individuals in need and help in an emergency. That way,
               | the jobs are saved, and the trains get more pleasant to
               | ride!
        
             | bluGill wrote:
             | Most train systems around the world are not automated. Even
             | though electronics can do better than a human driver, most
             | trains have a human driver. (in subway systems you should
             | be able to keep all dangers off the track so the safety
             | problem is much easier than roads where kids might be
             | playing in the street. But this requires platform screen
             | doors which is also rare)
             | 
             | The real advantage of automation though is without a human
             | driver it becomes cheap to run a lot of trains that are not
             | very full and that makes your system nearly as convenient
             | as driving in the suburbs.
        
               | sofixa wrote:
               | > Most train systems around the world are not automated
               | 
               | All modern ones (in an urban/suburban context, which is
               | what the post and thread are about; interurban is a bit
               | more mixed, but every high speed line is highly automated
               | too, because at those speeds there simply isn't the time
               | for a human to react) are.
               | 
               | > The real advantage of automation though is without a
               | human driver it becomes cheap to run a lot of trains that
               | are not very full
               | 
               | And you can also have a very high frequency (60-90s
               | intervals), which is impossible with manual operations.
               | This increases capacity, on top of the convenience.
        
         | KeplerBoy wrote:
         | On my local tram network you could even do that just by
         | listening to the noises made by the inverters, which drive the
         | motors.
         | 
         | They have a very distinct hum that matches the rpm of the
         | wheels. I once built a crude speedometer using SFTs, peak
         | detection and kalman filtering.
        
         | dariosalvi78 wrote:
         | I believe that their intention is to have something that works
         | on any track, without signatures. Collecting signatures would
         | be cool, but a massive work if you want to have good coverage
         | of cities AND phones. Maybe companies like Google or Apple have
         | the data and the capacity to do so, smaller companies less
         | likely.
        
           | bornfreddy wrote:
           | I was surprised to read they don't collect any data. That
           | would be a great way to gather samples to train the new
           | generations of detection NNs on. If it is properly anonymized
           | it shouldn't be a problem, imho (and I'm pretty paranoid wrt.
           | privacy).
        
       | DrNosferatu wrote:
       | Nice! dead reckoning to another level (Y)
       | 
       | ML level - for some reason, made me think of ITER / fusion
       | research trying to predict plasma behavior with ML also. Any
       | specific connections people in the know care to point out?
        
       | eps wrote:
       | There are metro systems where trains sometimes stop in the
       | tunnels or go at slower speeds.
       | 
       | I'm guessing this app won't work that well there. In fact it
       | would probably generate false positives when labeling stations...
       | ?
        
         | wffurr wrote:
         | I was just wondering how well this would do on a system in poor
         | repair with mixed generation trains that stop mid tunnel, i.e.
         | Boston.
        
       | daghamm wrote:
       | Correct me if I am wrong, but this looks like something that
       | Google would buy for 3.14B and quietly roll out to anything
       | including your smart toaster.
       | 
       | My point is, I see only one real business case for this.
        
         | froddd wrote:
         | It's a strong business case for the founders
        
         | araes wrote:
         | Similar thought, and Google acquire does seem like a plausible
         | route. However, checking over on Play [1] they've apparently
         | got In-App purchasing at $3-50 and 300+ cities and 1000+
         | transits that let you buy fare and passes. Seems like they're
         | already making money anyway. Teams pretty extensive though, so
         | it does look like a lot of annual money's probably necessary to
         | float. [2]
         | 
         | [1]
         | https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.thetransit...
         | 
         | [2] https://transitapp.com/team
        
           | xav0989 wrote:
           | They also partner with transit agencies where the transit
           | agencies pays them to upgrade everyone in the region/system
           | to the premium offering, and the transit app becomes the
           | official app for that transit agency.
        
           | RobotToaster wrote:
           | Yeah, I downloaded the app out of curiosity, but uninstalled
           | it once I saw it had the usual freemium subscription
           | nonsense.
        
             | kccqzy wrote:
             | I never paid a single cent in this app and yet the app is
             | perfectly enjoyable. I've used it since 2019. What's wrong
             | with freemium? I don't need extra features and the free
             | features are good enough for me.
        
               | procflora wrote:
               | The thing I specifically paid for (that Google Maps
               | doesn't seem to offer) is answering the question "what
               | transit lines/stops are nearby and how soon will a
               | service arrive at the stop?" Last I looked they limit the
               | number of lines shown in this way for freemium users.
               | 
               | If you're just putting in a destination and getting a
               | fastest route (much like you'd do in Google Maps), then I
               | didn't see much benefit to the premium version.
        
       | exabyte wrote:
       | https://youtu.be/bFM9HHB9JXI
       | 
       | I found this to be a really well-done video on using quantum
       | physics to track location integrating upon acceleration
        
       | mattlondon wrote:
       | Just tried installing it on my commute in London. Didn't work -
       | in fact it thought I was at the stop _before_ the one I got on at
       | (when I did have GPS) even when I was 5 or 6 stations further
       | along on my journey. Then it spent the whole rest of the journey
       | spamming me with notifications about the next departure time at
       | the station I didn 't get on at.
       | 
       | Wildly inaccurate even with GPS it seems.
       | 
       | Instant uninstall. Sorry.
        
         | wtk wrote:
         | Their website doesn't include London in the UK section
         | (https://TRANSITAPP.COM/REGION).
        
           | andylynch wrote:
           | Pretty sure that's a mistake, they do elsewhere
           | (https://transitapp.com/en/region/london/tfl ), and I'm using
           | it ,right now.
           | 
           | Not doing so would be astonishing given how many people use
           | public transport here, and that TFL's data is really, really
           | open + easy to use.
        
             | wtk wrote:
             | I checked twice in disbelief, but amongst many many places
             | - London (UK) not being listed was surprising to me. I
             | thought it's maybe some extra challenge of the oldest
             | subway system.
        
         | itsgrimetime wrote:
         | That's a bummer, I use it daily in SF and the tracker it has
         | for upcoming buses/trains has always been super accurate, and
         | the stop countdown is always dead on. It even tells me when I
         | need to speed up my walking to make it to the next bus in case
         | it's running a little early.
        
         | beejiu wrote:
         | CityMapper is probably the best app for London, although I
         | can't recall how it behaves in deep tunnels. I think it may
         | just use a timer to alert you when to get off.
        
         | wffurr wrote:
         | You could write to them and ask them to support London. Maybe
         | they'll fly Etienne over and have him ride the whole system!
        
       | rossant wrote:
       | Maybe ten years ago, I read a blog post by, I think, a French
       | company called snips, that explained how their app used the
       | pressure sensor to detect when the train entered or leaved a
       | station. It turned out there was a very clear signal due to the
       | sudden pressure increase or decrease when the train entered or
       | left the tunnel between the stations.
       | 
       | Edit: found it. https://medium.com/snips-ai/underground-location-
       | tracking-3e...
        
         | LukaszWiktor wrote:
         | Very few Android phones have a pressure sensor.
        
           | rossant wrote:
           | Maybe premium Android smartphones do? My Galaxy S24+ seems to
           | have one.
           | 
           | Edit: at least the excellent Physics Toolbox Sensor Suite
           | gives me a barometer signal indicating 102570 Pa right now.
        
             | LukaszWiktor wrote:
             | True. Flagship smartphones, and some rugged models do have
             | a pressure sensor.
        
           | plantain wrote:
           | Very many do -
           | https://m.gsmarena.com/results.php3?chkBarometer=selected
        
             | LukaszWiktor wrote:
             | > Your search returned 653 results.
             | 
             | When you remove the filter, it returns 12177 results. So
             | only ~5% of phone models include a barometer.
        
               | yccs27 wrote:
               | That's all phones ever, not current/popular models. When
               | you restrict it to the last 10 years, you get about 12%,
               | and of the 70 most popular models almost a quarter are
               | equipped with a barometer.
        
               | antonkochubey wrote:
               | Huh? I restricted it to 2023-now, and got 146 results. 80
               | for 2024 only.
        
               | jrvieira wrote:
               | 146 in how many? 80 in how many?
        
               | nielsole wrote:
               | 80/557
               | 
               | 146/1109
        
               | jrvieira wrote:
               | that's above 12% on both.
               | 
               | now correct it for number of sold phones each (estimated
               | by looking at the 70 most popular models) and we'll get
               | why they said 1/4.
        
               | lolinder wrote:
               | For an app as popular as Transit this is a purely
               | academic exercise--25% of the most popular models is
               | _way_ too low to be worth building their detection
               | around, even if they could assume that all of their
               | customers use the most popular models (which they
               | obviously can 't).
        
               | stavros wrote:
               | 25% of popular models doesn't mean 25% of phones
               | currently in circulation. If the iPhone has a barometer
               | (which it does), that's already a huge share of phones
               | out there.
        
               | hluska wrote:
               | The conversation was about Android.
        
               | azinman2 wrote:
               | But the point stands, it's about the distribution of
               | phones not how many models support it.
        
               | lolinder wrote:
               | I'm in favor of Transit trying to reach more than 25% of
               | the most popular phone models even if doing so would get
               | them 75% of the population.
        
               | michaelmior wrote:
               | It may be too low, but I'd imagine the app could also
               | look for other Transit users nearby and as long as one of
               | them has the appropriate sensor, this might be
               | sufficient. Probably still not something you want to rely
               | on since it would be pretty annoying to have a feature
               | not work when you're alone on a train.
        
               | cbhl wrote:
               | > the app could also look for other Transit users nearby
               | 
               | That seems unlikely in an environment with no cellular /
               | wifi signal. Theoretically possible, but expensive for
               | battery and probably disallowed by the OS.
        
               | thruway516 wrote:
               | Does the current version of their app run on 25% of the
               | most popular models? This update runs a classifier on
               | your phone. I imagine that would be no less restrictive
               | than the barometer requirement.
        
               | lolinder wrote:
               | Most classifiers are nowhere near as heavy as the LLMs
               | that are trending right now. The article doesn't specify,
               | but I would be surprised if the resource requirements are
               | especially onerous.
        
           | fragmede wrote:
           | you wouldn't need all of them to have it, just enough so that
           | wifi beacons in-between train stations could get added to the
           | bssid - gps coordinate map. Though if the vendors wanted work
           | with you, you could just tell them wifi bssid and the gps
           | coordinates of them and the rest of it would just work.
        
             | Normal_gaussian wrote:
             | There are unlikely to be wifi basestations detectable in
             | between stations, because these are underground trains.
        
               | fragmede wrote:
               | unless installed by the system operator, which is why
               | they'd know the gps coordinates for them
               | 
               | I'd have to have missed the title of the post, not read
               | the post itself, not read GP's comment, not thought about
               | why there'd be a pressure change, to have missed that
               | particular detail. I appreciate you trying to be helpful
               | though. :)
        
               | _kb wrote:
               | You don't need fixed base stations. Just infra on the
               | train that rolls bassid based on location data the train
               | already has. This would silently hook into native
               | location services already on devices without additional
               | sensing or models trained on other sensor data.
        
               | bluGill wrote:
               | There should be - everyone on the train wants
               | connectivity. Even if there is wifi on the train, that
               | wifi needs something to connect to.
        
           | oniony wrote:
           | I believe many do because it's used to fix GPS data when at
           | different elevations, if I remember correctly.
           | 
           | https://nextnav.com/why-phones-have-barometers/
        
             | telgareith wrote:
             | Maybe it'll help achieve a lock faster- but theres nothing
             | else needed for GPS besides GPS. The military really
             | doesn't like dependencies.
        
               | traverseda wrote:
               | Not a faster lock, air pressure is actually more accurate
               | on the z axis for the most part. GPS is not great at
               | height, and including an extremely accurate barometer is
               | a big help.
        
               | umeshunni wrote:
               | Why is GPS not great at height? If you know your location
               | is x,y and you have an elevation map, you can map x,y to
               | an altitude z, right?
        
               | Wowfunhappy wrote:
               | I know nothing about this, but I imagine two people at
               | the same latitude and longitude could be at different
               | altitudes.
               | 
               | A trivial example would be people on different floors of
               | a skyscraper--although I suppose gps works poorly indoors
               | anyway. Still, even outdoors there are peaks and
               | crevices, and on a steep slope a very trivial change in
               | lat/lon could lead to a major change in altitude.
        
               | ScottEvtuch wrote:
               | I would imagine it's because your distance to the
               | satellites changes more when you move along the ground
               | than when you move up and down the same amount.
        
               | avidiax wrote:
               | This is the basic reason.
               | 
               | https://www.ncesc.com/geographic-pedia/why-is-my-gps-
               | elevati...
        
               | ianburrell wrote:
               | One problem is that using position to get altitude would
               | require a detailed elevation map and that would use a lot
               | of storage space or require internet.
               | 
               | But elevation maps are not detailed enough and position
               | is not accurate enough to get accurate elevation. Think
               | about standing on trail along steep slope. The position
               | not being that accurate is fine since you know you are on
               | trail. But altitude could vary wildly going up or down
               | slope, or even up or down trail. It is probably similar
               | to GPS vertical accuracy, but were going for more
               | accuracy that barometer provides.
        
               | bobmcnamara wrote:
               | > Why is GPS not great at height?
               | 
               | Because the SATs only give you a pseudorange distance
               | between you and the sat, so each say is most accurate
               | solving for distance to/from that sat, and much less
               | helpful resolving angle to the sat.
               | 
               | With a clear SkyView, around just under half of the sats
               | are hidden by the earth.
               | 
               | This means that you get a full 360 degrees of data that
               | can be near the horizon helping resolve lat/long.
               | 
               | But only about half of that sky is helpful for altitude.
               | The birds you can't hear directly below the earth would
               | be the most helpful for improving the altitude fix if you
               | could hear them.
               | 
               | Baro is handy because you can take the absolute altitude
               | from GPS as a low frequency baseline and use the baro for
               | high frequency changes. Then when GPS says we teleported
               | +200 feet when a new sat comes into view, we can temper
               | that that with baro information.
        
               | sgarman wrote:
               | https://ciechanow.ski/gps/
        
               | dorfsmay wrote:
               | Do you then use the internet to find the local pressure,
               | or only use it to calculate changes in altitude?
        
               | traverseda wrote:
               | It's one factor in estimating altitude you feed into an
               | extended kalman filter. If the GPS altitude is holding
               | steady but there's a sudden jump in pressure that's
               | probably a storm front not indicative of motion.
               | 
               | You also probably want an accelerometer.
        
               | CamperBob2 wrote:
               | GPS itself is one _hell_ of a dependency. What the
               | military (and pretty much everyone else) wants right now
               | is redundancy.
        
             | rightbyte wrote:
             | I did an IMU once. You get way better and faster Z position
             | with barometer than with only GPS.
        
             | BurningFrog wrote:
             | GPS already gives you altitude in addition to longitude and
             | latitude, so I don't understand what the air pressure adds.
        
               | tqi wrote:
               | Vertical error for GPS is about 2X to 3X more than
               | horizontal error[1], so the barometer helps correct that.
               | 
               | [1] https://www.nstb.tc.faa.gov/reports/2020_Q4_SPS_PAN_v
               | 2.0.pdf...
        
           | maven29 wrote:
           | Just like the heart rate monitor, this was also moved into
           | smartwatches for optimizing revenue from those who truly need
           | it.
        
             | resoluteteeth wrote:
             | Are you saying that smartphones used to have heart rate
             | monitors but they were removed to force people to buy smart
             | watches?
        
               | astrange wrote:
               | Any phone that can record 120fps video has a heart rate
               | monitor, if you can calibrate it.
        
               | connicpu wrote:
               | I forget which generation it was now, but many years ago
               | I had a Samsung Galaxy phone that had a sensor that could
               | measure your heart rate if you put your finger over it
        
               | superhuzza wrote:
               | The Galaxy S7 definitely had this feature.
               | 
               | The problem is, it was basically useless. The main use
               | case for heart rate monitoring is continuously throughout
               | the day/night, or during exercise. A watch is very good
               | at this. An optical sensor on the back of your phone is
               | not.
               | 
               | Periodically checking your heart rate by holding your
               | phone in a specific way is not a useful feature for that
               | many people.
        
               | 6510 wrote:
               | For me, just having something that you can check 1 time
               | per year is much better than nothing. The anecdote: I was
               | working two heavy manual labor jobs 7 days per week and
               | felt absolutely fantastic, glowing with power. Turned out
               | the heart rate at rest was 180 lmao. Like a rabbit. Took
               | a few days off, it dropped below 70.
        
               | idiot900 wrote:
               | If your heart rate at rest is truly 180, you have an
               | arrhythmia and need to see a doctor.
        
               | 6510 wrote:
               | It should decline some 60 sec after physical activity. I
               | think I measured after 10-15 minutes. Fatigue,
               | dehydration, lack of sleep, a diet with lots of coffee. I
               | just added those to the todo list. I went home to sleep
               | (and confiscated the heart rate meter), the next morning
               | it was around 100 bpm which is still terrible shape. Over
               | the day it sunk to 80, over the 2nd day to 70, 3rd a bit
               | lower. Back at work it would barely elevate. The moral of
               | the story: Don't work out 11 hours per day for 6 months
               | straight.
        
               | chucksmash wrote:
               | +1. If a phone has a stopwatch, you can get your bpm at a
               | given moment with a finger and a multiplication (or
               | patience). Given the limited real estate on a mobile
               | phone it's crazy to devote any space for something so
               | trivial.
        
               | telgareith wrote:
               | It's not a separate sensor- 30fps on an iPhone was more
               | than enough.
               | 
               | Turns out, when you have a known luminance, white
               | balance, and frame-rate... the DSP to grab heart rate
               | from a finger is trivial.
        
           | adastra22 wrote:
           | I'm pretty sure every Android phone does. It's called a
           | microphone. It doesn't give absolute pressure values, but
           | that is not needed for this use case.
        
         | coumbaya wrote:
         | Another tidbit: on high speed trains (maybe on regular trains
         | too idk) the 'door flange' which is actually a hollow pneumatic
         | tube (it can detect spike in pressure that's how the train know
         | it's trying to close the door on somebody's hand) get's
         | pressurized higher before entering the tunnel, to mitigate the
         | "slam" effect due to the difference in pressure.
        
         | the-rc wrote:
         | Even before that, there was a Google Maps experiment using the
         | compass (magnetometer) to infer train movement, but IIRC the
         | accuracy of that depended on the network's current (DC vs AC)
         | and even the vintage of the cars.
        
           | mapt wrote:
           | Thing about training sensor fusion algorithms - more sensors,
           | more better. Often adding a terribly inaccurate sensor whose
           | failures are uncorrelated with the ones you're currently
           | using, because it operates on an unrelated principle, is the
           | thing that makes the solution highly accurate.
        
         | 30blay wrote:
         | Hi! Having worked on this project, I can provide some details
         | on why we didn't end up using the pressure sensor.
         | 
         | As others have stated, not all phones have pressure sensors,
         | and the quality of the readings also varies a lot between
         | different models. For example, we had one device where the
         | readings would spike when squeezing the phone.
         | 
         | Transit also doesn't have permission to read the pressure
         | sensor, and our use case wouldn't justify asking for it.
        
       | voidUpdate wrote:
       | I'm still a little confused as to how this shows where a train
       | actually is, it seems like this is only a solution to know when
       | you're on a train or not. Does it just guess based on what trains
       | should be moving at that time?
        
         | rdsubhas wrote:
         | I'd assume it's the length (in time) of the vibration since the
         | last stop. There may be edge cases where if the train is moving
         | slowly, but overall it's a smart technique.
        
           | voidUpdate wrote:
           | If there's a delay that will really confuse it though, either
           | if your train isn't going at the speed the app expects or it
           | stops at a point outside of a station
        
             | bluGill wrote:
             | It probably would, but if someone has the app running, then
             | the app knows what train they are trying to get on, and so
             | if the data is all consistent with being on a train they
             | are probably on that train. The app also knows where the
             | train is, so it knows where you are as well. It won't know
             | which train car you are on, but that normally doesn't
             | matter.
             | 
             | This probably is wrong if trains for both directions stop
             | at the same time from opposite sides of the same platform
             | and you get on the wrong train. However this is a rare
             | enough case that we can ignore it - but very annoying if
             | you are that person (this case happens to most transit
             | riders once or twice in their life). Even when this happens
             | there often is other location data scattered around so you
             | would likely only ride a stop or two before the app
             | realizes you are on the wrong train and can reroute you.
        
       | svag wrote:
       | This is a very interesting article. I suppose something similar
       | can be made for vehicles entering a tunnel, where eventually will
       | lose the GNSS signal.
       | 
       | I have noticed that a year ago or so, Google Maps app would lose
       | the GNSS signal and stop updating the position while there was no
       | signal. But now I have noticed that the position is updated,
       | although is not accurate. I wonder if something similar has been
       | implemented...
        
         | michaelt wrote:
         | 15 years ago, sat nav systems built into cars would sometimes
         | be fitted with a rate gyro and get a wheel speed signal from
         | the car - to make them work better in tunnels and other areas
         | with poor GPS signals.
         | 
         | (Of course, that one area of superior performance couldn't make
         | up for the awful GUIs, the awful resistive touchscreens, the
         | $100 map updates, and suchlike)
        
         | Cthulhu_ wrote:
         | I can't see inside Maps, but it does look like they use
         | accellerometer data or just assumptions to continue animating
         | your position on the map. Assumption being for example that you
         | will follow the route through the tunnel at your current
         | average speed. Close and good enough for most tunnels I
         | suppose.
        
         | sitkack wrote:
         | Apple maps does this.
        
       | maxehmookau wrote:
       | This is so freaking cool. What a fantastic idea and a great
       | write-up.
        
       | h1fra wrote:
       | Oh they so going to get bought by Google
        
       | tdiff wrote:
       | I believe Yandex does smth. similar in their navigation in
       | Moscow, because GPS is heavily jammed in some areas.
        
       | elromulous wrote:
       | Citymapper has been able to tell you what stop you're at for many
       | years (at least on the NYC subway). How does their solution work?
        
         | f1shy wrote:
         | No idea, but think about fingerprinting through available Wi-Fi
         | ssid and/or BT devices?
        
         | agos wrote:
         | not in Milan though, even though we have full cellular coverage
         | underground. I wonder why the difference
        
       | aitchnyu wrote:
       | Tangential, why dont phones use accelerometer+gravity to figure
       | out the path travelled and the "plane" its on when gps is out?
       | Somehow my running app knows my stride length but may refuse to
       | count the distance travelled when gps was out.
        
         | killingtime74 wrote:
         | (guessing) Stride length is a scalar, path is a vector?
         | Inertial navigation systems suffer from a build up of the
         | error. Perhaps it's not practical even if it's possible to
         | calculate position based on those sensors alone
        
         | sorenjan wrote:
         | To get position from accelerometer data you have to integrate
         | it twice. Accelerometer data is noisy, and integrating noise
         | quickly leads to large deviations. That's why you need some
         | kind of absolute position reference, like GPS, to not get
         | bigger and bigger errors.
         | 
         | Here, they seem to estimate which stations they are at or
         | between, and use that as absolute references.
         | 
         | Your running app is using accelerometer data to recognize when
         | you're taking a step, and combining that with GPS data to
         | measure how far you're running. So if it measures 100 meter
         | using GPS and counts 100 steps during that time, your step
         | length is 1 m. Garmin watches uses this to measure your running
         | distance on treadmills, but they want you to calibrate it by
         | running with GPS on a flat surface outdoor first. I don't know
         | if any watches or apps use this in combination with GPS to make
         | better position estimates when the GPS reception is poor, my
         | guess is no because it's really only useful for distance, not
         | position, and generally when running outdoors you're not
         | running in completely straight lines. But it should be possible
         | to estimate distance and combining it with their routing
         | software to guess which way you took for short parts of the
         | course.
        
       | Woeps wrote:
       | Uhm, Don't most underground trains already show you where you
       | are? Or at worst, the sign of the station shows you your
       | location?
        
         | yaky wrote:
         | I think it's one of the "pointless but cool" projects, but yes,
         | I don't get it either. Any decent underground system would
         | already have audio and visual announcements; I don't think I
         | have ever cared to know where between stations the train is.
        
         | makeworld wrote:
         | Supporting it in the app allows connection info (bus, other
         | train, etc) to be updated and to warn the user if they'll be
         | late.
        
       | aucisson_masque wrote:
       | Side note, that's why I don't like that the Google plays services
       | in Android have a permanent access to Physical Activity that
       | can't be disabled.
       | 
       | Even without gps data, just having access to your phone
       | accelerometer is enough to give a lot of data about your life.
       | Cumulated with Google insanely big amount of data about wifi
       | access point location, it means that they know where you are even
       | without gps activated and how you got there.
        
         | sourcepluck wrote:
         | Any good links for reading more about Play Services access to
         | the phone's accelerometer?
        
       | alkonaut wrote:
       | I visited London this weekend and found even many underground
       | _stations_ were without mobile service, 15 years after I got used
       | to having spotless end-to-end mobile coverage even in deepest
       | tunnels. I don't know why the London Underground lags that of
       | other cities?
       | 
       | Knowing the next station is usually a solved problem that doesn't
       | need a smartphone, because that's displayed in the train itself
       | and called out on speakers. But once you are on the platform and
       | you need to ask the route planner what the fastest route is to a
       | specific station (It could be walking to the surface and taking a
       | bus, so it's not as simple as looking at the subway map) - then
       | you are out of luck if platforms don't have 4/5G coverage!
        
         | vinay427 wrote:
         | The usual answer that will be thrown around to justify this is
         | that London has the oldest underground metro system, whether
         | that's relevant or not. It doesn't seem very relevant when even
         | the deepest stations in Prague (which are newer but much deeper
         | than most of London) have later added 5G throughout tunnels
         | with download speeds of ~200 Mbps between stations.
         | 
         | I suspect the UK just doesn't have modern standards for mobile
         | internet service, as it isn't limited to TfL services in
         | London.
         | 
         | There isn't even reliable mobile coverage on stretches of the
         | West Coast Main Line rail corridor in England, which is
         | outdoors and connects the UK's most populous cities.
         | 
         | Much of London isn't particularly reliable either on most
         | mobile networks, in my experience. Meanwhile, in cities like
         | Prague or Washington I can often get mobile download speeds
         | outdoors of 400 Mbps - 1-2 Gbps.
        
         | beejiu wrote:
         | Almost all tunnel sections now have 4G/5G and everything should
         | be done by the end of this year according to Tfl.
        
           | lol768 wrote:
           | They've given "targets" and deadlines before and failed to
           | meet them. I would take whatever they say with a large
           | portion of salt.
        
         | DrBazza wrote:
         | Half the LU tunnels are barely larger than the train, the other
         | half are cut'n'cover. And they're rarely straight. And most
         | lines run from 5am to midnight. Some now run almost 24 hrs.
         | 
         | That probably influences the decisions on roll-out and cost.
         | 
         | TFL has been ahead-of-the-curve with the rollout of some tech
         | (Oyster cards, tap'n'go), but not so much with others when they
         | get hacked.
         | 
         | https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c4gqg2elkj4o
         | 
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oyster_card#Precursor
        
       | dmazin wrote:
       | This is SO cool.
       | 
       | I am actually currently working on a project to record the sound
       | of the London Underground passing under me.
       | 
       | We can very clearly hear the Northern Line under us. It's < 30
       | meters below us.
       | 
       | I have become obsessed with getting high-quality, low frequency
       | recordings of it passing under us.
       | 
       | Why? I don't know. I just can't take my mind off it.
       | 
       | For example, there are two tunnels (north and south bound). By
       | correlating it with actual TfL data, can I figure out the sound
       | signature of each?
       | 
       | More intriguingly, I know that there are maintenance vehicles
       | that operate under us in off hours. Can I "catch" them?
       | 
       | I'm not sure what else I might do with this project, but the idea
       | of capturing the sound of this semi-ephemeral creature that
       | operates below me has captivated me.
        
         | dmos62 wrote:
         | That's awesome. What sensors have you considered?
         | 
         | I'm interested in extremely weak, high-frequency vibrations of
         | everyday things while in resting state (which is sort of the
         | opposite of what you're after, as I understand), but have not
         | gotten far in acquiring the sensors. I'd love to get a laser
         | doppler vibrometer, but they're pricey.
        
           | dmazin wrote:
           | Well, I was just going to put a contact mic in my cellar. My
           | understanding is that this is the best way to pick up low-
           | frequency vibrations.
           | 
           | I know very little about audio engineering. I wonder what
           | else I might be able to use to pick up the vibration
           | signature?
           | 
           | I completely understand your drive to pick up those high-
           | frequency vibrations! There's a whole secret world of
           | vibrations out there, and we can analyze it!
        
             | jbl0ndie wrote:
             | You might struggle using microphones if it's very low
             | frequency because most human audio microphones
             | intentionally filter frequencies that are below (and above)
             | human hearing range. Perhaps fixing to he contact mic to
             | the right resonant object might serve to translate the low
             | frequency to a higher frequency?
             | 
             | Could you use the accelerometer on a smart phone to 'hear'
             | the vibrations?
        
               | dmazin wrote:
               | I don't know if a contact mic really has any filtering
               | though; it's just a piezo element that I plug into a pre-
               | amp.
               | 
               | However, what you're saying is completely legit. I read
               | that I might want to lay a large, sturdy thing on the
               | floor and put the mic on that, for the same reason that
               | you gave. I used a large old pane of glass that I found
               | in the cellar.
        
               | cruffle_duffle wrote:
               | All that came to my mind is making sure to physically
               | bond it to the floor. But then you still need to have
               | something that moves relative to the magnet and then I
               | got confused again.
               | 
               | What do seismographs do? People also use acoustic pings
               | to measure soil and rock density underground. What are
               | those devices using for their "microphone"?
               | 
               | And yeah, would an accelerometer work? I don't know what
               | the temporal resolution is on your standard Amazon /
               | AliExpress accelerometer is but it's probably pretty
               | decent?
        
             | myself248 wrote:
             | "Geophone" is the device you seek.
             | 
             | Amplifying and digitizing the signal is straightforward for
             | an experienced EE, but you might look into acquiring some
             | Raspberry Shake hardware which has it all already done.
        
               | dmazin wrote:
               | Oh, snap. Thank you. Guess I'm about to be $350 poorer!
        
           | pavel_lishin wrote:
           | Stupid question, but how far can you get with a laser, a
           | mirror, and a light sensor?
        
             | richjdsmith wrote:
             | That's actually a really cool idea. I am not sure what
             | variance there would be on a light sensor though.
        
               | pavel_lishin wrote:
               | I remember building a toy interferometer in high school -
               | a laser, splitter and a mirror. You could definitely see
               | the interference patterns when you'd press on a wall with
               | a finger.
               | 
               | Maybe something like that could be turned into a
               | reasonable microphone?
        
         | comboy wrote:
         | My kind of people. Good luck!
        
         | meitham wrote:
         | Ha! If you happen to live in the battle area of South Wimbledon
         | then the noise from the northern line in the early hours of the
         | morning can wake you up! It's roughly 30 meters under too!
        
           | dmazin wrote:
           | What I learned is that the Northern Line has the most noise
           | complaints (from people who live near it) of any TfL line!
        
         | immibis wrote:
         | These are electric trains. I'd be interested to know if a big
         | coil of wire picks up a signature as well.
        
           | dmazin wrote:
           | Woah. A bit of reading shows that the signal would be
           | incredibly weak, especially because of shielding.
           | 
           | I wonder what other ways there might be to detect it.
           | 
           | Someone else mentioned literal vibration, but I figure a
           | contact mic would already pick that up - I mean, sound is
           | already vibration...
        
           | Symbiote wrote:
           | The oldest deep London Underground lines have iron tunnel
           | segments, which might make this method particularly
           | difficult.
           | 
           | https://www.ltmuseum.co.uk/collections/collections-
           | online/in...
        
         | toomuchtodo wrote:
         | Could you use a ground mount seismic sensor?
        
         | frenchman_in_ny wrote:
         | I was at an Open House at the Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory
         | [0] a few weeks ago, and one of the researchers was doing
         | something adjacent to this -- recording the sound of
         | earthquakes for analysis. Will try to find who it was.
         | 
         | [0] https://lamont.columbia.edu/
        
         | IIAOPSW wrote:
         | I am sure that your work in discriminating what's happening
         | deep underground with nothing more than passively recording
         | surreptitiously available signals at the surface level on non-
         | specialist hardware is of interest to a few governmental
         | offices.
        
         | yzydserd wrote:
         | Have you looked into whether a Raspberry Shake might be
         | adequate?
        
         | kjkjadksj wrote:
         | I used to live about 300 yards from where the subway went and I
         | felt like I could hear it. I'm not sure if it was residual
         | sounds from the sidewalk emergency exits or from the earth
         | ringing like a bell.
        
       | snodnipper wrote:
       | I worked for signalbox.io and they had this for the London
       | Underground ~8 years ago. There was some impressive maths /
       | approaches behind all of the "magic".
        
       | bambax wrote:
       | Dead reckoning is... hard.
       | 
       | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dead_reckoning
       | 
       | The first car navigator, the Etak, came out in 1985 and used dead
       | reckoning and quantization to tell where the car was on the map;
       | see this excellent article from 2017:
       | 
       | https://www.fastcompany.com/3047828/who-needs-gps-the-forgot...
       | 
       | Today dead reckoning is used in aerial navigation, and commercial
       | planes (and others) are equipped with Inertial Navigation systems
       | to supplement GPS information; they are getting more and more
       | precise but can still go wrong and need frequent re-calibration.
       | 
       | The next step is "Quantum Positioning System" that promises to
       | detect infinitely small movements and produce perfect dead
       | reckoning at all times, with a precision of the order of one
       | centimeter. It has already been tested successfully. For now the
       | machines are heavy and extremely expensive, but it's imaginable
       | that in some not-so-distant future the technology will be much
       | more available.
       | 
       | https://newatlas.com/aircraft/quantum-navigation-infleqtion-...
        
         | jackdh wrote:
         | There is a very good set of podcasts[0] by Cautionary Tales
         | about the German V2 rockets in WW2 which tried to use this. It
         | was so hard the Allies allowed them to continue wasting money
         | on it during the war. Well worth a listen to if you're into
         | that.
         | 
         | [0] https://timharford.com/2023/07/cautionary-tales-
         | the-v2-trilo...
        
         | zokier wrote:
         | General dead reckoning is hard.
         | 
         | But dead reckoning for train travel should be massively easier.
         | Train movement is constrained to tracks so you only need to
         | resolve how far along track train has moved + possible
         | junctions, which should already make the problem much simpler
         | than e.g. airplane ins where you are resolving full 3d
         | position. To make things even more easier, you only need to
         | reckon between individual stops which prevents error
         | accumulation over the whole trip. Lastly you have schedule
         | information, so you know roughly where the train should be at
         | any given moment.
        
       | DrBazza wrote:
       | Is this the same sort of technique that Shazam uses?
        
       | barbegal wrote:
       | With this sort of tech it only achieves good usability if it is
       | accurate a high percentage of the time. Anything less than 90%
       | accuracy on a whole trip and I likely won't trust it. So that
       | means getting to >99% accurate on each underground train stop.
       | I'm still not sure if this tech reaches that sort of threshold or
       | if this is one of those things that looks like a good idea on
       | paper but falls apart in real world use cases.
        
         | sitkack wrote:
         | Once enough people have the app, there will be a whole time
         | varying point cloud of data both on and off the train.
        
           | datameta wrote:
           | Is that their stated goal? Are they not saying they will not
           | use user virbation data?
        
             | sitkack wrote:
             | I'd assume they would have some opt in, or allowance for
             | either federated learning or sharing of anonymized sensor
             | data.
             | 
             | Google is a huge advantage here, they have both the spatio-
             | temporal intent of the user as well as the physical flow
             | feed. There is so much position data flowing off android
             | phones, that they are able to see the whole topology.
        
       | wffurr wrote:
       | "Classifier" how quaint. I am impressed that they wrote the whole
       | article without mentioning "AI" one time.
        
         | worewood wrote:
         | Good. Shows that engineering is on the driver seat, not
         | marketing.
        
       | devit wrote:
       | Wouldn't dead reckoning with the accelerometer and gyroscope in
       | addition to their machine learning improve this significantly?
       | (constraining motion along the known tunnel path when in a moving
       | train, constraining the user to be within the train stopping
       | rectangle when detecting a train starting to move)
       | 
       | Or is the hardware in smartphones too inaccurate even with the
       | extra information?
        
         | pbmonster wrote:
         | > Wouldn't dead reckoning with the accelerometer and gyroscope
         | in addition to their machine learning improve this
         | significantly?
         | 
         | The thing that should help the most would probably be the hall
         | sensor/magnetometer/compass. That should output decent dead
         | reckoning.
         | 
         | Doing this just with the gyroscope will work very well for
         | short movements, but it will be close to useless on long,
         | gentle curves. Unfortunately, those MEMS gyroscopes drift quite
         | a lot over tens of seconds. Not a problem if you can do sensor
         | fusion with the magnetometer (reckoning) and the accelerometer
         | (where is "down"), but the latter can't be used on a fast
         | train, acceleration/deceleration of the vehicle and forces in
         | curves make finding gravity challenging. No idea how well a
         | compass works inside a subway tunnel.
         | 
         | But maybe I'm wrong, I just have experience trying an
         | "artificial horizon" app on an aircraft - and here, the
         | accelerometer is completely useless for "down". A single
         | maneuver with some Gs and the horizon has no idea what the
         | pitch angle is. Noisy magnetic environment, GPS off? It also
         | doesn't know where it's going.
        
           | porphyra wrote:
           | I wonder how well magnetometers would work inside metal
           | trains full of electric motors.
        
         | bluGill wrote:
         | That is what they are doing. Dead reckoning is generally very
         | inaccurate though, so by recognizing when they are on a train
         | they can greatly increase accuracy because they know exactly
         | where the train is.
        
           | crazygringo wrote:
           | Is it? The article doesn't say so.
           | 
           | It says they use the accelerometer for detecting the user's
           | current mode of transportation, not the distance.
           | 
           | It says they use the train schedules to figure out the
           | current location of the train, based on when it started
           | moving and how long it's been moving.
           | 
           | They don't mention anything like dead reckoning anywhere,
           | unless I missed it?
        
         | KTibow wrote:
         | Yeah while the solution they implemented is very interesting it
         | doesn't actually "predict your location in a subway tunnel
         | using your phone's vibration signature"
        
         | porphyra wrote:
         | Using the IMU seems hard as true signal of the train's gradual
         | acceleration is likely drowned out by the noise of vibrations
         | and the person's natural movements. I guess every time the
         | train is stopped, you can calibrate the bias of the IMU if the
         | user is standing/sitting sufficiently still, but even then the
         | dead reckoning would drift a lot.
        
       | gregoriol wrote:
       | This is way too heavy computing, battery consumption, ... while
       | fun engineering, it's very much inefficient to perform
        
       | 0xFEE1DEAD wrote:
       | @OP how can I get my city added to the app?
       | 
       | I was excited to try it out but bummed to see my city isn't
       | listed. It's even more disappointing considering Ulm Germany
       | (with around 100k people) is there, but Cologne Germany (with a
       | population of about 1.1mil) isn't.
       | 
       | There are lots of potential users here, especially since the
       | official apps are aweful.
        
       | starlite-5008 wrote:
       | Innovative
        
       | ripe wrote:
       | Can we take a moment to appreciate the engaging, conversational
       | tone of the writing? The article was a pleasure to read, even
       | when it gets into some weeds explaining the frequency charts,
       | etc. (I read the English-language version).
       | 
       | Whoever wrote this did a fantastic job.
        
         | justinko wrote:
         | Yes, the lovely tone of a human being (not AI).
        
           | lallysingh wrote:
           | I donno which humans you read, but most people I know
           | defecate their thoughts onto a page. Actually good writing
           | takes a lot of effort most people don't do. AI's got a decent
           | baseline.
        
         | vaughnegut wrote:
         | Their product release posts and their engineering posts are
         | usually really well written. Transit App is a gem
        
           | yonatan8070 wrote:
           | This is the first time I'm hearing about it I downloaded it
           | pretty much as soon as I finished reading the blog post, only
           | to discover it's not available in my region :-(
        
       | tgtweak wrote:
       | I think you can "spoof" gps satellite timestamp transmissions
       | with single transmitter inside the train. This would require on-
       | train equipment but typically the trains know where they are and
       | could translate that into the required gps satellites and
       | timestamp signatures to allow any devices onboard to acquire a
       | "gps" signal and decode the location using timestamp variation.
       | 
       | I don't believe any of those are encrypted and transmit
       | ~1000-10000 time per second on 1500-1600mhz spectrum which is
       | fairly simple to reproduce using even a cheap SDR kit.
       | 
       | It could also work with 0 input from the train's telemetry - in
       | much the same way as the app - the device would get a reference
       | gps signal (or wifi/BLE when it knows it's in the station), then
       | with a built-in accelerometer (which it has the luxury of
       | direction + stability if it's mounted in the train car) it can
       | determine with greater accuracy where the train is and how far
       | it's moved.
        
         | Aurornis wrote:
         | > I think you can "spoof" gps satellite timestamp transmissions
         | with single transmitter inside the train.
         | 
         | Spoofing GPS as a commercial operation is a quick way to get
         | your company crushed by regulatory agencies.
        
           | bluGill wrote:
           | I think there should be regulations that allow sending real
           | GPS from low power ground based system. Sending incorrect GPS
           | is a major problem, but a lot of location issues would become
           | much easier if the owners of buildings would just install
           | cheap GPS transmitters.
        
             | acc_297 wrote:
             | It seems like this functionality could be tacked on to
             | "MSA" which I just learned is an FCC mandatory technology
             | for most cell phones
             | 
             | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assisted_GNSS
        
           | cruffle_duffle wrote:
           | I mean obviously you'd set it up through the proper channels.
           | I'm sure there is a regulatory framework for doing exactly
           | this sort of thing already.
        
         | acc_297 wrote:
         | I wonder if you could just create a map of the cellular
         | antennas along the metro/subway tunnels. Maybe I misunderstand
         | how connectivity is delivered in underground systems it may
         | pretend to be a "single cohesive base station" from a phones
         | perspective but if there are thousands of antennas throughout
         | the system and the phone switches from one to the next
         | regularly you can decently estimate the location.
        
       | ingen0s wrote:
       | This is why I open this site everyday several times a day
        
       | zephyreon wrote:
       | As a user of Transit (thank you for such a great app!) this was
       | always one of my biggest annoyances. Not just transit though --
       | with any app that supports navigation on public transit (looking
       | at you Apple Maps).
       | 
       | I figured someone was working on this but it's so refreshing to
       | read about the thought and level of detail that went into your
       | design. What an effort too! Congratulations transit team, you all
       | should be so proud for solving what I'd imagine is one of
       | transit's largest small gripes.
        
       | bsimpson wrote:
       | I live between stations. One is a nicer walk; the other is a
       | shorter walk. I check the next train when I leave to see which
       | station to walk to.
       | 
       | Would be useful if I could teach this to your app.
        
       | mateobelanger wrote:
       | Test
        
       | 333c wrote:
       | I used this feature in the New York subway last week. I didn't
       | know it was new. It's a cool idea, but it didn't work for me. The
       | app said that the train was several stops behind its actual
       | location.
        
       | yonran wrote:
       | > It now makes the right location prediction 90% of the time.
       | 
       | I'm curious about the failure cases. Are they caused by
       | exceptional circumstances, such as the train moving more slowly
       | than normal or skipping a station? Or when you unexpectedly catch
       | an express train or go the opposite direction? Does the algorithm
       | know that it doesn't know where you are, or does it confidently
       | tell you the wrong station until the GPS is acquired?
        
         | Lance_ET_Compte wrote:
         | For the express vs. local, sometimes it will ASK me what train
         | I am on. When there are delays that cause trains to be closer
         | together, it does this. I presume they are crowd-sourcing some
         | data instead of trying to only use an algorithm.
         | 
         | I do love this "Transit" app though.
        
         | 30blay wrote:
         | Great question! I'm one of the developers behind this project
         | and your guesses are good.
         | 
         | Other difficult cases include trains stopping between two
         | stations (doesn't happen everywhere, but it's frequent in NYC),
         | or a user walking fast onboard a moving train, which can be
         | mistaken for the user having gotten off the train.
         | 
         | Taking a train in the opposite directions will break the
         | assumptions we make and we won't know until the next GPS
         | location
        
       | clarkmoody wrote:
       | Alternative title idea: "Instead of Reaching for AI, we used Good
       | Old-Fashioned Engineering to Solve a Tough Problem"
        
         | alanbernstein wrote:
         | Is machine learning old-fashioned already?
        
           | ant6n wrote:
           | Machine learning is part of AI.
        
       | riffic wrote:
       | would love to use collective sensor data to shame operators who
       | accelerate or brake too harshly. that's kind of my transit
       | annoyance these days.
        
       | admax88qqq wrote:
       | I find the bus tracking of this app in my city is pretty poor
       | unfortunately. Probably not the apps fault probably an issue of
       | the municipality but still annoying.
       | 
       | That being said, if this app could convince cities to also be
       | used for payment that would be a game changer. Uber for public
       | transit would really remove so much friction from using transit.
        
         | 43920 wrote:
         | They do support payment in some cities (mine included), and it
         | works pretty well.
         | 
         | A bunch of the larger / better-funded systems are also moving
         | to just accepting credit cards directly on the readers, which
         | is even easier.
        
         | jer0me wrote:
         | Some cities let you pay with contactless credit cards (at least
         | London and New York have it; Boston and San Francisco are
         | working on it) which seems like the most elegant solution to
         | this, at least from a commuter's point of view.
        
         | ladams wrote:
         | You can pay in the app on the Denver RTD system!
        
           | admax88qqq wrote:
           | Awesome!
        
       | lacoolj wrote:
       | The timing of this post is nuts. I was thinking about a post-
       | apocalyptic future last night (as one does) and wondered if using
       | the gyro on your phone would suffice if the initial location and
       | full map was already available.
       | 
       | I think the answer is still unclear since they are using pre-
       | determined routes (easier to track east -> west or east ->
       | southwest than it is east -> north -> south -> north -> east
       | again). But this is very cool that they have so much of the work
       | done already. Maybe even all of it? I don't have the code to look
       | at so -\\_(tsu)_/-
       | 
       | Either way, still freaked out they read my mind lol
        
         | showerst wrote:
         | This is called inertial navigation, and it works over short
         | distances but then breaks down due to cumulative error.
         | 
         | This is a pretty cool use case though since as you said it
         | would be much easier over a fixed route.
        
       | nycerrrrrrrrrr wrote:
       | Great article, I'll have to try it out next time I'm on the
       | subway.
       | 
       | One correction though - there is no subway line that goes across
       | the Queensboro.
        
       | sailfast wrote:
       | I appreciate that this is not a mass surveillance play and all of
       | the data stays on your phone. Well done!
        
         | ipython wrote:
         | So true. This is the sort of thing that is so exciting from a
         | usability and engineering standpoint. Until some marketer gets
         | their hands on it and decide that they can increase the ROI on
         | microtargeting advertisements by 0.1% if they use this data.
         | Suddenly, we continue to slide into the advertising and
         | propaganda driven attention economy dystopia.
         | 
         | Here's to the future!
        
       | jacooper wrote:
       | Google maps(wuth google location service) is alao crazy accurate
       | underground somehow.
        
       | armada651 wrote:
       | Why all the complicated detection? The user already knows whether
       | or not they are on a train, you don't need to tell them.
       | 
       | Just show the predicted location of the train they should be on
       | separately from their last known GPS position. Of course it would
       | be difficult to market that alone as a novel innovative AI
       | feature.
        
         | patrickmcnamara wrote:
         | Trains at my U-Bahn station are as frequent as every two/three
         | mins sometimes. There is no "the train they should be on".
        
       | IIAOPSW wrote:
       | A few thoughts come to mind. Some said others not.
       | 
       | 1. Seems a bit weird to be looking at the accelerometer data yet
       | miss the obvious approach of summing up the acceleration to get
       | the velocity and then summing that up to get position. Yes I know
       | about drift but even then I'd assume the fairly constant several-
       | second g force of pulling in or out of a station or taking a
       | curve would be a strong signal easy to distinguish from short
       | lived jostling.
       | 
       | 2. The "train moving" frequency you discovered via fourier
       | analysis was most likely the hunting oscillation. This has to do
       | with how the wheels of the train are designed to force it to turn
       | opposite to any deviation from the direction of the track. Thus
       | there is a back and forth "hunting" for the center that is
       | completely determined by the geometry of the track and the
       | wheels, and therefore the length of track per complete back-and-
       | forth cycle (aka the wavelength) is constant. The frequency of
       | the oscillation (aka back-and-forth cycles per second) is just
       | this constant length divided by the velocity of the train. This
       | fact could be leveraged to estimate the actual train speed rather
       | than just moving/not moving.
       | 
       | 3. Combining 1 and 2, a combination of integrating acceleration
       | and confirming / correcting estimated velocity with the expected
       | hunting oscillation would likely be the most powerful / reliable
       | model.
       | 
       | 4. Using a classifier seems overkill here. But I'm sure at some
       | point it was easier to just raw-data it than work out a theory
       | driven model which accounted for all the practical confounding
       | factors.
        
         | ezfe wrote:
         | You still need to know when they are on a train, because you
         | need to know what time they got on the train and started
         | moving.
         | 
         | You also have to assume that GPS has already been lost at this
         | point, so you have to do it from the departure location of the
         | train at the right time.
        
         | cenamus wrote:
         | That's just an inertial nav systems, quite useful for missiles
         | before/without usable GNSS, but also probably quite inaccurate
         | with the MEMS accelerometers in phones.
         | 
         | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inertial_navigation_system
         | 
         | Semi-related but just as fascinating:
         | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrain-following_radar
        
         | simsla wrote:
         | I was thinking in a different direction. Maybe we can
         | fingerprint the turns or other jerks/shakes along a route.
         | Accelerometer Shazam.
        
         | 30blay wrote:
         | I'm one of the developers behind this project, so I want to
         | jump in because we did explore some of these solutions.
         | 
         | You are correct in saying the low frequency acceleration from
         | starts, stops and turns can be distinguished from the higher
         | frequency noise.
         | 
         | One big challenge was with orientation. Acceleration can look
         | the same as deceleration and turns from the sensor's
         | perspective, if you turn the phone around. Taking the integral
         | of the gyro reading, the error would grow quadratically, and we
         | found magnetometer readings unreliable depending on the
         | vehicles.
         | 
         | Your point about the hunting oscillation is interesting and I
         | agree, estimating the speed would be a great improvement.
        
       | CarVac wrote:
       | I'm trying this out literally right now and it got fooled by an
       | unscheduled stop due to train traffic. It thought we were already
       | at the next stop and took a bit to get its bearings again.
       | 
       | At least in NYC it should listen for door beeps.
        
       | ekzy wrote:
       | Could you also pick up the audio announcements? Could be weird
       | for the app to request microphone permission though, but I think
       | lots of lines have them and should be doable to transcribe them
       | locally on the phone. I think your approach is better and
       | simpler, but as I was reading the edge cases (like someone
       | changing train and going back in the other direction), the audio
       | could maybe help getting from 90% accuracy to 98%. Sounds a bit
       | more involved to implement though.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2024-11-13 23:01 UTC)