SIST-TS CEN ISO/TS 17444-2:2014

SLOVENSKI STANDARD
SIST-TS CEN ISO/TS 17444-2:2014
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
SIST-TS CEN ISO/TS 17444-2:2014 en,fr,de
2003-01.Slovenski inštitut za standardizacijo. Razmnoževanje celote ali delov tega standarda ni dovoljeno.

---------------------- Page: 1 ----------------------

SIST-TS CEN ISO/TS 17444-2:2014

---------------------- Page: 2 ----------------------

SIST-TS CEN ISO/TS 17444-2:2014

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.

---------------------- Page: 3 ----------------------

SIST-TS CEN ISO/TS 17444-2:2014
CEN ISO/TS 17444-2:2013 (E)
Contents Page
Foreword .3

2

---------------------- Page: 4 ----------------------

SIST-TS CEN ISO/TS 17444-2:2014
CEN ISO/TS 17444-2:2013 (E)
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.

3

---------------------- Page: 5 ----------------------

SIST-TS CEN ISO/TS 17444-2:2014

---------------------- Page: 6 ----------------------

SIST-TS CEN ISO/TS 17444-2:2014

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

---------------------- Page: 7 ----------------------

SIST-TS CEN ISO/TS 17444-2:2014
ISO/TS 17444-2:2013(E)

COPYRIGHT PROTECTED DOCUMENT


©  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

---------------------- Page: 8 ----------------------

SIST-TS CEN ISO/TS 17444-2:2014
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 2013 – All rights reserved iii

---------------------- Page: 9 ----------------------

SIST-TS CEN ISO/TS 17444-2:2014
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

---------------------- Page: 10 ----------------------

SIST-TS CEN ISO/TS 17444-2:2014
ISO/TS 17444-2:2013(E)
Bibliography.93

© ISO 2013 – All rights reserved v

---------------------- Page: 11 ----------------------

SIST-TS CEN ISO/TS 17444-2:2014
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

---------------------- Page: 12 ----------------------

SIST-TS CEN ISO/TS 17444-2:2014
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 2013 – All rights reserved vii

---------------------- Page: 13 ----------------------

SIST-TS CEN ISO/TS 17444-2:2014
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 th
...