EN ISO TS 17444-2-2013 en Electronic fee collection - Charging performance - Part 2 Examination Framework《电子收费 收费性能 第2部分 检查框架》.pdf

《EN ISO TS 17444-2-2013 en Electronic fee collection - Charging performance - Part 2 Examination Framework《电子收费 收费性能 第2部分 检查框架》.pdf》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《EN ISO TS 17444-2-2013 en Electronic fee collection - Charging performance - Part 2 Examination Framework《电子收费 收费性能 第2部分 检查框架》.pdf（106页珍藏版）》请在麦多课文档分享上搜索。

1、BSI Standards PublicationElectronic fee collection Charging performancePart 2: Examination FrameworkPD CEN ISO/TS 17444-2:2013National forewordThis Published Document is the UK implementation of CEN ISO/TS 17444-2:2013.The UK participation in its preparation was entrusted to TechnicalCommittee EPL/2

2、78, Intelligent transport systems.A list of organizations represented on this committee can be obtained onrequest to its secretary.This publication does not purport to include all the necessary provisions ofa contract. Users are responsible for its correct application. The British Standards Institut

3、ion 2013.Published by BSI Standards Limited 2013ISBN 978 0 580 84322 8ICS 03.220.20; 35.240.60Compliance with a British Standard cannot confer immunity fromlegal obligations.This Published Document was published under the authority of theStandards Policy and Strategy Committee on 31 December 2013.Am

4、endments/corrigenda issued since publicationDate Text affectedPUBLISHED DOCUMENTPD CEN ISO/TS 17444-2:2013TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION SPCIFICATION TECHNIQUE TECHNISCHE SPEZIFIKATION CEN ISO/TS 17444-2 November 2013 ICS 03.220.20; 35.240.60 English Version Electronic fee collection - Charging performance

5、 - Part 2: Examination Framework (ISO/TS 17444-2:2013) Perception du tlpage - Performance dimputation - Partie 2: Cadre dexamen (ISO/TS 17444-2:2013) Elektronische Gebhrenerhebung - Erhebungsqualitt - Teil 2: Rahmenbedingungen fr Prfungen (ISO/TS 17444-2:2013) This Technical Specification (CEN/TS) w

6、as approved by CEN on 30 September 2013 for provisional application. The period of validity of this CEN/TS is limited initially to three years. After two years the members of CEN will be requested to submit their comments, particularly on the question whether the CEN/TS can be converted into a Europ

7、ean Standard. CEN members are required to announce the existence of this CEN/TS in the same way as for an EN and to make the CEN/TS available promptly at national level in an appropriate form. It is permissible to keep conflicting national standards in force (in parallel to the CEN/TS) until the fin

8、al decision about the possible conversion of the CEN/TS into an EN is reached. CEN members are the national standards bodies of Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ir

9、eland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey and United Kingdom. EUROPEAN COMMITTEE FOR STANDARDIZATION COMIT EUROPEN DE NORMALISATION EUROPISCHES KOMITEE FR NORMUNG CEN-CENELEC Management C

10、entre: Avenue Marnix 17, B-1000 Brussels 2013 CEN All rights of exploitation in any form and by any means reserved worldwide for CEN national Members. Ref. No. CEN ISO/TS 17444-2:2013 EPD CEN ISO/TS 17444-2:2013CEN ISO/TS 17444-2:2013 (E) 2 Contents Page Foreword 3 PD CEN ISO/TS 17444-2:2013CEN ISO/

11、TS 17444-2:2013 (E) 3 Foreword This document (CEN ISO/TS 17444-2:2013) has been prepared by Technical Committee ISO/TC 204 “Intelligent transport systems“ in collaboration with Technical Committee CEN/TC 278 “Intelligent transport systems” the secretariat of which is held by NEN. Attention is drawn

12、to the possibility that some of the elements of this document may be the subject of patent rights. CEN and/or CENELEC shall not be held responsible for identifying any or all such patent rights. According to the CEN-CENELEC Internal Regulations, the national standards organizations of the following

13、countries are bound to announce this Technical Specification: Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, N

14、orway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey and the United Kingdom. Endorsement notice The text of ISO/TS 17444-2:2013 has been approved by CEN as CEN ISO/TS 17444-2:2013 without any modification. PD CEN ISO/TS 17444-2:2013ISO/TS 17444-2:2013(E) ISO 2013

15、All rights reserved iiiContents Page Introduction.vii 1 Scope1 2 Normative references1 3 Terms and definitions .2 4 Symbols and Abbreviated terms .7 5 Examination Framework.8 5.1 General .8 5.2 Method for defining a Specific Examination Framework 9 5.2.1 Selection of Metrics to be evaluated .9 5.2.2

16、 Definition of environmental conditions and associated performance requirements.10 5.2.3 Determination of Required Sample Sizes .10 5.2.4 Selection of methods for generating Charging Input and Reference Data .10 5.2.5 Determination of Test Routes / Sub-set of Charged Network for generating represent

17、ative trips.10 5.2.6 Documentation of the Specific Examination Framework11 5.3 Sources of Data .11 5.4 Methods of generating charging input14 5.4.1 Predefined routes (identifier: “PVP”) 15 5.4.2 Reference System (used in combination with identifiers: “PVR” and “UVR”) .16 5.4.3 Simulated OBE / FE (id

18、entifier: “SO”) .17 5.4.4 Dedicated OBE Testing (identifier: “DO”).17 5.5 Applicability of metrics scheme types 18 5.6 Charging Metric Selection Tables21 5.6.1 General .21 5.6.2 DSRC Discrete .21 5.6.3 Autonomous Discrete .22 5.6.4 Autonomous Continuous .23 6 Examination Tests.25 6.1 Common (and DSR

19、C Discrete) Examination Tests25 6.1.1 General .25 6.1.2 ET-CM-E2E-1 E2E Correct Charging Rate.25 6.1.3 ET-CM-E2E-2 E2E Overcharging Rate.26 6.1.4 ET-CM-E2E-3 E2E Undercharging Rate.26 6.1.5 ET-CM-E2E-4 E2E Late Charging Rate 27 6.1.6 ET-CM-UA-1 UA - Correct Charging Rate28 6.1.7 ET-CM-UA-2 UA - Over

20、charging Rate28 6.1.8 ET-CM-UA-3 UA - Undercharging Rate29 6.1.9 ET-CM-UA-4 UA - Accurate application of Payments and Refunds .30 6.1.10 ET-CM-UA-5 UA Accurate Personalisation of OBUs 30 6.1.11 ET-CM-PC-1 PC - Correct Charging Rate31 6.1.12 ET-CM-PC-2 PC Overcharging Rate .31 6.1.13 ET-CM-PC-3 PC -

21、Undercharging Rate 32 6.1.14 ET-CM-PC-4 PC - Latency TC 33 6.1.15 ET-CM-PC-5 PC - Late Payment Claims 33 6.1.16 ET-CM-PC-6 PC Rejected Payment Claim Rate.34 6.1.17 ET-CM-BD-1 BD - Correct Charging Rate34 6.1.18 ET-CM-BD-2 BD Overcharging Rate .35 6.1.19 ET-CM-BD-3 BD - Undercharging Rate36 6.1.20 ET

22、-CM-BD-4 BD - Incorrect Charging Rate.37 PD CEN ISO/TS 17444-2:2013ISO/TS 17444-2:2013(E) iv ISO 2013 All rights reserved6.1.21 ET-CM-BD-5 BD - Latency TC37 6.1.22 ET-CM-BD-6 BD Late Billing Details .38 6.1.23 ET-CM-BD-7 BD Rejected Billing Details Rate.38 6.1.24 ET-CM-BD-8 BD Incorrectly rejected B

23、illing Details Rate 39 6.1.25 ET-CM-BD-9 BD Inferred Billing Details Rate 39 6.2 DSRC Discrete Optional DSRC Toll Declaration Metrics40 6.2.1 General40 6.2.2 ET-CM-TD-1 TD - Correct Toll Declaration Generation 40 6.2.3 ET-CM-TD-2 TD - Incorrect Toll Declaration Generation40 6.2.4 ET-CM-TD-3 TD Late

24、Toll Declarations.41 6.2.5 ET-CM-TD-4 TD - TSP Event Detection41 6.2.6 ET-CM-TD-5 TD - TSP False Positive .42 6.3 Autonomous Discrete Specific Examination Tests43 6.3.1 General43 6.3.2 ET-CM-TD-1 TD - Correct Toll Declaration Generation 43 6.3.3 ET-CM-TD-2 TD - Incorrect Toll Declaration Generation4

25、3 6.3.4 ET-CM-TD-3 TD Late Toll Declarations.44 6.3.5 ET-CM-TD-4 TD - TSP Event Detection44 6.3.6 ET-CM-TD-5 TD - TSP False Positive .45 6.3.7 ET-CM-DTD-1 DTD - Correct Charging Rate (Chargeable Events) .45 6.3.8 ET-CM-DTD-2 DTD - Incorrect Charge Event recognition46 6.3.9 ET-CM-DTD-3 DTD - Missed C

26、harge Event Recognition .46 6.3.10 ET-CM-DTD-4 DTD Overcharging Rate47 6.3.11 ET-CM-CR-1 CR - Correct Charge Report Generation .47 6.3.12 ET-CM-CR-2 CR - Incorrect Charge Report Generation.48 6.3.13 ET-CM-CR-3 CR - Charge Report Latency.48 6.3.14 ET-CM-CR-4 CR TSP Front End Event Detection 49 6.3.15

27、 ET-CM-CR-5 CR TSP Front End False Positive .49 6.3.16 ET-CM-DCR-1 DCR - Correct Charging Rate (Chargeable Events).50 6.3.17 ET-CM-DCR-2 DCR - Incorrect Charge Event recognition.50 6.3.18 ET-CM-DCR-3 DCR - Missed Charge Event Recognition.51 6.3.19 ET-CM-DCR-4 DCR - Overcharging rate (Incorrect false

28、 positive Charge Event Recognition).51 6.4 Autonomous Continuous Specific Examination Tests52 6.4.1 General52 6.4.2 ET-CM-TD-1 TD - Correct Toll Declaration Generation 52 6.4.3 ET-CM-TD-2 TD - Incorrect Toll Declaration Generation52 6.4.4 ET-CM-TD-3 TD Late Toll Declarations.53 6.4.5 ET-CM-TD-4 TD -

29、 TSP Event Detection53 6.4.6 ET-CM-TD-5 TD - TSP False Positive .54 6.4.7 ET-CM-CTD-1 CTD Correct Charging Rate54 6.4.8 ET-CM-CTD-2 CTD Overcharging Rate55 6.4.9 ET-CM-CTD-3 CTD Accuracy of Distance/Time Measurement55 6.4.10 ET-CM-CR-1 CR - Correct Charge Report Generation .56 6.4.11 ET-CM-CR-2 CR -

30、 Incorrect Charge Report Generation.57 6.4.12 ET-CM-CR-3 CR - Charge Report Latency.57 6.4.13 ET-CM-CR-4 CR TSP Front End Event Detection 58 6.4.14 ET-CM-CR-5 CR TSP Front End False Positive .58 6.4.15 ET-CM-CCR-1 CCR - Correct Charging Rate.59 6.4.16 ET-CM-CCR-2 CCR - Overcharging Rate.59 6.4.17 ET

31、-CM-CCR-3 CCR - Accuracy of Distance/Time Measurement.60 Annex A (informative) Examination Test Documentation Template 61 Annex B (informative) Examination Framework Considerations .62 Annex C (informative) Statistical Considerations 66 Annex D (informative) Methods for reducing sample sizes for ver

32、y high/low probability metrics during the Evaluation Phase 72 Annex E (informative) Example Specific Examination Frameworks 75 PD CEN ISO/TS 17444-2:2013ISO/TS 17444-2:2013(E) ISO 2013 All rights reserved vBibliography93 PD CEN ISO/TS 17444-2:2013ISO/TS 17444-2:2013(E) ISO 2013 All rights reserved v

33、iiIntroduction Electronic Tolling systems are complex distributed systems involving critical technology such as dedicated short range communication (DSRC) and global navigation satellite systems (GNSS) both subject to a certain random behaviour that may affect the computation of the charges. Thus, i

34、n order to protect the interests of the different involved stakeholders, in particular Service Users and Toll Chargers, it is essential to define metrics that measure the performance of the system as far as computation of charges is concerned and ensure that the potential resulting errors in terms o

35、f size and probability are acceptable. These metrics will be an essential tool when establishing requirements for the systems and also for examination of the system capabilities both during acceptance and during the operational life of the system. In addition, in order to ensure the interoperability

36、 of different systems it will be necessary to agree on common metrics to be used and on the actual values that define the required acceptable performances although this is not covered in this Technical Specification. This Technical Specification is defined as a toolbox standard of examination tests

37、plus a method for defining and documenting Specific Examination Frameworks to meet specific needs. The detailed choice of the set of examination tests within an Examination Framework depends on the application and the respective context. Compliance with this specification is understood as using the

38、definitions and prescriptions laid out in this Technical Specification whenever the respective system aspects are subjected to performance measurements, rather than using other definitions and examination methods than the ones specified in this Technical Specification. ISO/TS 17444-1 defines a set o

39、f charging performance metrics with appropriate definitions, principles and formulations, which together make up a reference framework for the establishment of requirements for EFC systems and their later examination of the charging performance. These charging performance metrics are intended for us

40、e with any toll scheme, regardless of its technical underpinnings, system architecture, tariff structure, geographical coverage, or organizational model. They are defined to treat technical details that may be different among technologies as a “black box”. They focus solely on the outcome of the cha

41、rging process i.e. the amount charged in relation to a pre-measured or theoretically correct amount rather than intermediate variables from various components as sensors, such as positioning accuracy, signal range, or optical resolution. This approach ensures comparable results for each metric in al

42、l relevant situations. The metrics are designed to cover the information exchanged on the front-end interface and the interoperability interfaces between Toll Service Providers and Toll Chargers as well as information on the end-to-end level. Metrics for the following information exchanges are defin

43、ed: charge reports; toll declarations; billing details and associated event data; payment claims on the level of user accounts; end to end metrics which assess the overall performance of the charging process. The proposed metrics are specifically addressed to protect the interests of the actors in a

44、 toll system, such as Toll Service Providers, Toll Chargers and Service Users. The metrics can be used to define requirements (e.g. for requests for proposals) and for performance assessment. PD CEN ISO/TS 17444-2:2013ISO/TS 17444-2:2013(E) viii ISO 2013 All rights reservedToll schemes take on vario

45、us forms as identified in ISO/TS 17575 suite and ISO 14906. In order to create a uniform performance metric specification toll schemes are grouped into two classes, based on the character of their primary charging variable: Charging based on discrete events (charges associated to the fact that a veh

46、icle is crossing or standing within a certain zone), and those based on a continuous measurement (duration or distance). In all these toll schemes, tolls may additionally vary as a function of vehicle class characteristics such as trailer presence, number of axles, taxation class, operating function

47、, and depending on time of day or day of week, such that e.g. tariffs are higher in rush hour and lower on the weekends. With this degree of complexity, it is not surprising to find that the attempts to evaluate and compare technical solutions for Service User charging have been made uniquely each t

48、ime a procurement or study is initiated, and with only limited ability to reuse prior comparisons made by other testing entities. Examination Framework The Examination Framework that is defined in this part of ISO/TS 17444 is designed for measuring the metrics defined in ISO/TS 17444-1. The general

49、aim is to achieve a maximum of comparability and reproducibility of the results without restricting the technological choices in system design. Specific Examination Frameworks maybe defined for the Evaluation and Monitoring Phases of a project due to the differences in the availability of equipped vehicles. Evaluation Phase This phase encompasses system evaluation and selection as well as commissioning and ramp up during implementation. Important aspects of this phase are: relatively small sam