CEN ISO/TS 17444-2:2013

SLOVENSKI STANDARD
01-marec-2014
(OHNWURQVNRSRELUDQMHSULVWRMELQ,]YDMDQMH]DUDþXQDYDQMDGHO2NYLUQLSRJRML
]DSUHYHUMDQMH,6276
Electronic fee collection - Charging performance - Part 2: Examination Framework
(ISO/TS 17444-2:2013)
Elektronische Gebührenerhebung - Erhebungsqualität - Teil 2: Rahmenbedingungen für
Prüfungen (ISO/TS 17444-2:2013)
Perception du télépéage - Performance d'imputation - Partie 2: Cadre d'examen (ISO/TS
17444-2:2013)
Ta slovenski standard je istoveten z: CEN ISO/TS 17444-2:2013
ICS:
03.220.20 Cestni transport Road transport
35.240.60 Uporabniške rešitve IT v IT applications in transport
transportu in trgovini and trade
2003-01.Slovenski inštitut za standardizacijo. Razmnoževanje celote ali delov tega standarda ni dovoljeno.

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION
CEN ISO/TS 17444-2
SPÉCIFICATION TECHNIQUE
TECHNISCHE SPEZIFIKATION
November 2013
ICS 03.220.20; 35.240.60
English Version
Electronic fee collection - Charging performance - Part 2:
Examination Framework (ISO/TS 17444-2:2013)
Perception du télépéage - Performance d'imputation - Elektronische Gebührenerhebung - Erhebungsqualität - Teil
Partie 2: Cadre d'examen (ISO/TS 17444-2:2013) 2: Rahmenbedingungen für Prüfungen (ISO/TS 17444-
2:2013)
This Technical Specification (CEN/TS) was 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 European 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 final 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, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania,
Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey and United
Kingdom.
EUROPEAN COMMITTEE FOR STANDARDIZATION
COMITÉ EUROPÉEN DE NORMALISATION

EUROPÄISCHES KOMITEE FÜR NORMUNG

CEN-CENELEC Management Centre: Avenue Marnix 17, B-1000 Brussels
© 2013 CEN All rights of exploitation in any form and by any means reserved Ref. No. CEN ISO/TS 17444-2:2013 E
worldwide for CEN national Members.

Contents Page
Foreword .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 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
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, Norway, 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.
TECHNICAL ISO/TS
SPECIFICATION 17444-2
First edition
2013-11-15
Electronic fee collection — Charging
performance —
Part 2:
Examination Framework
Perception du télépéage — Performance d'imputation —
Partie 2: Cadre d'examen
Reference number
ISO/TS 17444-2:2013(E)
©
ISO 2013
ISO/TS 17444-2:2013(E)
©  ISO 2013
All rights reserved. Unless otherwise specified, no part of this publication may be reproduced or utilized otherwise in any form or by any
means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, or posting on the internet or an intranet, without prior written permission.
Permission can be requested from either ISO at the address below or ISO’s member body in the country of the requester.
ISO copyright office
Case postale 56  CH-1211 Geneva 20
Tel. + 41 22 749 01 11
Fax + 41 22 749 09 47
E-mail copyright@iso.org
Web www.iso.org
Published in Switzerland
ii © ISO 2013 – All rights reserved

ISO/TS 17444-2:2013(E)
Contents Page
Foreword .vi
Introduction.vii
1 Scope.1
2 Normative references.1
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 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 representative
trips.10
5.2.6 Documentation of the Specific Examination Framework.11
5.3 Sources of Data .11
5.4 Methods of generating charging input.14
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 (identifier: “SO”) .17
5.4.4 Dedicated OBE Testing (identifier: “DO”).17
5.5 Applicability of metrics scheme types .18
5.6 Charging Metric Selection Tables.21
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 DSRC Discrete) Examination Tests.25
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 Rate.28
6.1.7 ET-CM-UA-2 UA - Overcharging Rate.28
6.1.8 ET-CM-UA-3 UA - Undercharging Rate.29
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 Rate.31
6.1.12 ET-CM-PC-2 PC – Overcharging Rate .31
6.1.13 ET-CM-PC-3 PC - 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 Rate.34
6.1.18 ET-CM-BD-2 BD – Overcharging Rate .35
6.1.19 ET-CM-BD-3 BD - Undercharging Rate.36
6.1.20 ET-CM-BD-4 BD - Incorrect Charging Rate.37
ISO/TS 17444-2:2013(E)
6.1.21 ET-CM-BD-5 BD - Latency – TC.37
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 Billing Details Rate .39
6.1.25 ET-CM-BD-9 BD – Inferred Billing Details Rate .39
6.2 DSRC Discrete – Optional DSRC Toll Declaration Metrics.40
6.2.1 General.40
6.2.2 ET-CM-TD-1 TD - Correct Toll Declaration Generation .40
6.2.3 ET-CM-TD-2 TD - Incorrect Toll Declaration Generation.40
6.2.4 ET-CM-TD-3 TD – Late Toll Declarations.41
6.2.5 ET-CM-TD-4 TD - TSP Event Detection.41
6.2.6 ET-CM-TD-5 TD - TSP False Positive .42
6.3 Autonomous Discrete Specific Examination Tests.43
6.3.1 General.43
6.3.2 ET-CM-TD-1 TD - Correct Toll Declaration Generation .43
6.3.3 ET-CM-TD-2 TD - Incorrect Toll Declaration Generation.43
6.3.4 ET-CM-TD-3 TD – Late Toll Declarations.44
6.3.5 ET-CM-TD-4 TD - TSP Event Detection.44
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 recognition.46
6.3.9 ET-CM-DTD-3 DTD - Missed Charge Event Recognition .46
6.3.10 ET-CM-DTD-4 DTD Overcharging Rate.47
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 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 positive Charge Event
Recognition).51
6.4 Autonomous Continuous Specific Examination Tests.52
6.4.1 General.52
6.4.2 ET-CM-TD-1 TD - Correct Toll Declaration Generation .52
6.4.3 ET-CM-TD-2 TD - Incorrect Toll Declaration Generation.52
6.4.4 ET-CM-TD-3 TD – Late Toll Declarations.53
6.4.5 ET-CM-TD-4 TD - TSP Event Detection.53
6.4.6 ET-CM-TD-5 TD - TSP False Positive .54
6.4.7 ET-CM-CTD-1 CTD Correct Charging Rate.54
6.4.8 ET-CM-CTD-2 CTD Overcharging Rate.55
6.4.9 ET-CM-CTD-3 CTD Accuracy of Distance/Time Measurement.55
6.4.10 ET-CM-CR-1 CR - Correct Charge Report Generation .56
6.4.11 ET-CM-CR-2 CR - 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-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 very high/low probability metrics
during the Evaluation Phase .72
Annex E (informative) Example Specific Examination Frameworks .75
iv © ISO 2013 – All rights reserved

ISO/TS 17444-2:2013(E)
Bibliography.93

ISO/TS 17444-2:2013(E)
Foreword
ISO (the International Organization for Standardization) is a worldwide federation of national standards bodies
(ISO member bodies). The work of preparing International Standards is normally carried out through ISO
technical committees. Each member body interested in a subject for which a technical committee has been
established has the right to be represented on that committee. International organizations, governmental and
non-governmental, in liaison with ISO, also take part in the work. ISO collaborates closely with the
International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) on all matters of electrotechnical standardization.
International Standards are drafted in accordance with the rules given in the ISO/IEC Directives, Part 2.
The main task of technical committees is to prepare International Standards. Draft International Standards
adopted by the technical committees are circulated to the member bodies for voting. Publication as an
International Standard requires approval by at least 75 % of the member bodies casting a vote.
In other circumstances, particularly when there is an urgent market requirement for such documents, a
technical committee may decide to publish other types of document:
— an ISO Publicly Available Specification (ISO/PAS) represents an agreement between technical experts in
an ISO working group and is accepted for publication if it is approved by more than 50 % of the members
of the parent committee casting a vote;
— an ISO Technical Specification (ISO/TS) represents an agreement between the members of a technical
committee and is accepted for publication if it is approved by 2/3 of the members of the committee casting
a vote.
An ISO/PAS or ISO/TS is reviewed after three years in order to decide whether it will be confirmed for a
further three years, revised to become an International Standard, or withdrawn. If the ISO/PAS or ISO/TS is
confirmed, it is reviewed again after a further three years, at which time it must either be transformed into an
International Standard or be withdrawn.
Attention is drawn to the possibility that some of the elements of this document may be the subject of patent
rights. ISO shall not be held responsible for identifying any or all such patent rights.
ISO/TS 17444-2 was prepared by Technical Committee ISO/TC 204, Intelligent transport systems, and by
Technical Committee CEN/TC 278, Road transport and traffic telematics in collaboration.
ISO/TS 17444 consists of the following parts, under the general title Electronic fee collection — Charging
performance:
⎯ Part 1: Metrics
⎯ Part 2: Examination Framework
vi © ISO 2013 – All rights reserved

ISO/TS 17444-2:2013(E)
Introduction
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, in 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 of 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 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 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 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 of 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 use 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 charging 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 all 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 defined:
⎯ 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 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.
ISO/TS 17444-2:2013(E)
Toll schemes take on various 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
vehicle 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, 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 time 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 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 sample sizes;
⎯ well controlled behaviour of test vehicles.
Monitoring Phase
After the system has gone into operation, its behaviour needs to be monitored for several reasons, such as
fine-tuning of the system performance, monitoring of SLAs between contractual partners (supplier, Toll
Charger, Toll Service Provider, etc.). In this phase the following system aspects can be expected:
⎯ very large sample sizes possible, but with unknown behaviour of the vehicles;
⎯ in principle all measurements from implementation phase possible, too.
Readers Guide
To understand the content of this part of ISO/TS 17444, the reader should be aware of the methodology and
assumptions used to develop the Examination Framework and associated examination tests; therefore a
suggested reading order is given below:
1) Annex B provides details of the underlying considerations for developing the Examination
Framework.
2) Annex C provides background statistical information which will enable the reader to determine
sample sizes and confidence limits based on the defined performance requirements.
3) Clause 5 provides the definition of the Examination Framework for the evaluation of Charging
Performance.
4) Clause 6 contains the toolbox of Examination Tests for the evaluation of charging performance for the
identified scheme types.
viii © ISO 2013 – All rights reserved

ISO/TS 17444-2:2013(E)
5) Annex D contains methods which can be used to reduce the required sample sizes for metrics with
high / low probabilities during the evaluation phase.
6) Annex E provides an example(s) of Specific Examination Frameworks which have been developed in
accordance with the methodology in Clause 5.2.

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION ISO/TS 17444-2:2013(E)

Electronic fee collection — Charging performance — Part 2:
Examination Framework
1 Scope
This part of ISO/TS 17444 defines the Examination Framework for the measurement of Charging
Performance Metrics defined in ISO/TS 17444-1 to be used during Evaluation and/or on-going Monitoring.
It specifies a method for the specification and documentation of a Specific Examination Framework which can
be used by the responsible entity to evaluate charging performance for a particular information exchange
interface or for overall charging performance within a Toll Scheme.
It provides a toolbox of Examination Tests for the roles of Toll Charger and Toll Service Provider for the
following Scheme types:
a) DSRC Discrete;
b) Autonomous Discrete;
c) Autonomous Continuous.
The detailed choice of the set of examination tests to be used depends on the application and the respective
context. Compliance with this specification is understood as using the 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.
Out of scope of this specification are the following aspects:
⎯ This Technical Specification does not propose specific numeric performance bounds, or average or
worst-case error bounds in percentage or monetary units. Those decisions are left to the Toll Charger (or
to agreements between Toll Charger and Service Provider).This Technical Specification does not
consider the evaluation of the expected performance of a system based on modelling and measured data
from trial at another place.
⎯ This Technical Specification does not consider the specification of a common reference system which
would be required for comparison of performance between systems.
⎯ This Technical Specification defines measurements only on standardised interfaces. Proprietary
interfaces are excluded, because it is not possible to define standardised metrics on such system
properties. These excluded interfaces are among others the link between Toll Charger RSE and central
systems in DSRC systems, and the additional sensor input of GNSS modules (inertial sensors, CAN-bus
for wheel ticks, etc.).
2 Normative references
The following documents, in whole or in part, are normatively referenced in this document and are
indispensable for its application. For dated references, only the edition cited applies. For undated references,
the latest edition of the referenced document (including any amendments) applies.
ISO/TS 17444-1, Electronic fee collection — Charging performance — Part 1: Metrics
ISO/TS 17444-2:2013(E)
ISO 12855:2012, Electronic fee collection — Information exchange between service provision and toll
charging
ISO/TS 17575-1:2010, Electronic fee collection — Application interface definition for autonomous systems —
Part 1: Charging
ISO 17573:2010, Electronic fee collection — Systems architecture for vehicle-related tolling
3 Terms and definitions
For the purposes of this document, the following terms and definitions apply.
3.1
absolute charging error
difference between the measured charge (toll) value and the actual value (as measured by a reference
system)
Note 1 to entry: A positive error means that the measurement exceeds the actual one.
[SOURCE: ISO/TS 17444-1:2012, definition 3.1]
3.2
accepted charging error interval
interval of the Relative Charging Error varying from a negative (undercharge) to a positive (overcharge) value
that the Toll Charger considers as acceptable, i.e. correct charging
[SOURCE: ISO/TS 17444-1:2012, definition 3.2]
3.3
average relative charging error
ratio between the sum of computed charges associated to a set of vehicles during a certain period of time and
the actual due charge (for the same set of vehicles and the same period) minus 1
[SOURCE: ISO/TS 17444-1:2012, definition 3.3]
3.4
billing detail
for a given Transport Service, all necessary data required to determine and/or verify the amount due for the
Service User
Note 1 to entry: If the data is accepted by both the Toll Charger and the Toll Service Provider, then it is called a
concluded Billing Detail which can be used to issue a Payment Claim.
Note 2 to entry: For a given Transport Service, the Billing Detail is referring to one or several valid Toll Declaration(s).
A valid Billing Detail” has to fulfil formal requirements, including security requirements, agreed between the Toll Service
Provider and the Toll Charger.
[SOURCE: ISO 12855:2012, definition 3.1]
3.5
chargeable event
event in which a vehicle passes through a Charge Object that implies that vehicle has to be charged or a
different rate (e.g. price per kilometre) applied
Note 1 to entry: This event refers to the use of a certain object and not to the mechanisms by which detection is
produced.
[SOURCE: ISO/TS 17444-1:2012, definition 3.5]
2 © ISO 2013 – All rights reserved

ISO/TS 17444-2:2013(E)
3.6
charge object
any object that is part of the toll context description that may be charged for its use under certain conditions
[SOURCE: ISO/TS 17575-1:2010, definition 3.6]
3.7
charging period
period of time which is used to define the frequency of the Toll Declarations, when Charge Reports are
aggregated to form Toll Declarations
Note 1 to entry: If the Charging Period is set to 24 h then in the Toll Context Data a single Toll Declaration is submitted
for each 24 h period for each Service User.
[SOURCE: ISO/TS 17444-1:2012, definition 3.7]
3.8
Charge Relevant Event
event occurring within a tolling system, which is relevant for charge calculation, but not for the detection of a
Charge Object itself
Note 1 to entry: Examples of this type of event are changes in vehicle category or time zone.
[SOURCE: ISO/TS 17444-1:2012, definition 3.8]
3.9
charge report
data structure transmitted from the Front End to the Back End to report road usage data and supplementary
related information
Note 1 to entry: In 2009/750/EC, Charge Report is referred to as “Toll Declaration”.
[SOURCE: ISO 12855:2012, definition 3.2]
3.10
discrete toll scheme
toll scheme where the charge is calculated based on distinct events associated with the identification of
Charge Objects such as crossing a cordon, passing a bridge, being present in an area, etc.
Note 1 to entry: Each event is associated with a certain charge.
[SOURCE: ISO/TS 17444-1:2012, definition 3.10]
3.11
continuous toll scheme
toll scheme where the charge is calculated based on the accumulation of continuously measured
parameter(s), such as, distance, time, etc.
[SOURCE: ISO/TS 17444-1:2012, definition 3.11]
3.12
event detection
element of the system responsible for detecting Chargeable Events associated with a Charge Object
Note 1 to entry: The output of this element provides the key information to compute a charge in a discrete scheme, or
act as input for a function in a continuous scheme (e.g. for zones where distance tariffs apply).
[SOURCE: ISO/TS 17444-1:2012, definition 3.12]
ISO/TS 17444-2:2013(E)
3.13
evaluation
process applied for measuring a specific metric or set of metrics during an evaluation phase
[SOURCE: ISO/TS 17444-1:2012, definition 3.13]
3.14
Front End
part(s) of the toll system where road usage data for an individual Service User are collected, processed and
delivered to the Back End
Note 1 to entry: The Front End comprises the on-board equipment and an optional proxy.
[SOURCE: ISO/TS 17575-1, definition 3.13]
3.15
false positive event
Chargeable Event that did not take place but is recorded by the system
[SOURCE: ISO/TS 17444-1:2012, definition 3.15]
3.16
missed recognition event
Chargeable Event that takes place but is not recorded by the system
[SOURCE: ISO/TS 17444-1:2012, definition 3.16]
3.17
monitoring
process within a distributed system for collecting and storing state data
Note 1 to entry: This can be used to observe metrics during operation.
[SOURCE: ISO/TS 17444-1:2012, definition 3.17]
3.18
overcharging
situation when the calculated charge is above the Accepted Charging Error Interval
[SOURCE: ISO/TS 17444-1:2012, definition 3.18]
3.19
payment claim
recurring statement referring to concluded Billing Details made available to the Toll Service Provider by the
Toll Charger who indicated and justified the amount due
Note 1 to entry: The payment claim is used by the Toll Service Provider to issue financial objects to its customers (e.g.
invoices on behalf of the Toll Charger). A given toll payment claim is referring to concluded Billing Details and takes into
account any specific commercial conditions applicable to a vehicle, a fleet of vehicles, a customer of a Toll Service
Provider and/or a Toll Service Provider. A valid “payment claim” has to fulfil formal requirements, including security
requirements, agreed between the Toll Service Provider and the Toll Charger.
[SOURCE: ISO 12855:2012, definition 3.14]
3.20
performance metrics
specific calculations used to describe the charging performance of a system. These calculations are
technology- and schema-independent
[SOURCE: ISO/TS 17444-1:2012, definition 3.20]
4 © ISO 2013 – All rights reserved

ISO/TS 17444-2:2013(E)
3.21
population
totality of items under consideration
[SOURCE: ISO 3534-1:2006]
3.22
relative charging error
ratio between the Absolute Charging Error and the actual value, i.e. Relative Charging Error = Absolute
Charging Error / Actual Value
Note 1 to entry: The topic of Actual Values and how to handle them will be dealt with in the Examination Framework.
[SOURCE: ISO/TS 17444-1:2012, definition 3.21]
3.23
representative trips
trips that are of a distance larger than a defined threshold and so have to be considered by the related metrics
Note 1 to entry: Only trips which exceed the threshold and cover the specific types of roads of the Toll Regime have to
be considered.
Note 2 to entry: The threshold may be defined as zero.
[SOURCE: ISO/TS 17444-1:2012, definition 3.22]
3.24
sample
subset of a population made up of one of more of the individual parts in which the population is divided
[SOURCE: ISO 3534-1:2006, modified]
3.25
service user
customer of a Toll Service Provider, one liable for toll, the owner of the vehicle, a fleet operator, a driver, etc.,
depending on the context
[SOURCE: ISO 12855:2012, definition 3.29]
3.26
specific examination framework
particular instance of a set of Examination Tests defined by an entity to determine the performance of specific
selected Charging Metrics during either Evaluation and or Monitoring
3.27
successful charging
situation where the user has been correctly charged according to the rules of the system
Note 1 to entry: For discrete Toll Schemes this means that for a given chargeable journey the Chargeable Events
have been correctly identified and for continuous schemes that the Charge determined is within the Accepted Charging
Error Interval.
[SOURCE: ISO/TS 17444-1:2012, definition 3.24]
3.28
Toll Charger
legal entity charging toll for vehicles in a toll domain
Note 1 to entry: In other documents the terms operator or toll operator can be used.
[SOURCE: ISO 17573:2010, definition 3.16]
ISO/TS 17444-2:2013(E)
3.29
Toll Service Provider
legal entity providing customer toll services on one or more toll domains for one or more classes of vehicle
Note 1 to entry: In other documents the terms issuer or contract issuer can be used.
Note 2 to entry: The Toll Service Provider can provide the OBE or can provide only a magnetic card or a smart card to
be used with OBE provided by a third party (just as a mobile telephone and a SIM card can be obtained from different
parties).
Note 3 to entry: The Toll Service Provider is responsible for the operation (functioning) of the OBE with respect to
tolling.
[SOURCE: ISO 17573: 2010, definition 3.23]
3.30
toll declaration
statement to a Toll Charger that confirms the presence of a vehicle in a toll domain in a format agreed
between the Toll Service Provider and the Toll Charger
Note 1 to entry: A valid Toll Declaration has to fulfil formal requirements, including security requirements, agreed
between the Toll Service Provider and the Toll Charger.
[SOURCE: ISO 12855 2012, declaration 3.19]
3.31
trip
part of space-time trajectory of a particular vehicle within a Toll Scheme
Note 1 to entry: The exact definition of the start and end of trip is dependent on the Toll Regime and technology
approach.
[SOURCE: ISO/TS 17444-1:2012, definition 3.28]
3.32
undercharging
situation where the calculated charge is below the Accepted Charging Error Interval
[SOURCE: ISO/TS 17444-1:2012, definition 3.29]
3.33
user
generic term used for the customer of a Toll Service Provid
...