The Science Behind 10-Second Detection
Academic research proves what we deliver: traditional traffic data providers take 6-15+ minutes to detect incidents. Our CV-powered platform does it in under 10 seconds.
Why Detection Speed Matters
Every minute of delay in incident detection increases risk and cost
Secondary Crash Prevention
Every minute an incident goes undetected increases secondary crash risk by up to 2.8%. Faster alerts mean safer roads.
Autonomous Vehicle Safety
AV systems need sub-minute incident awareness. 6-15 minute delays from traditional providers create dangerous blind spots.
Emergency Response
Real-time detection enables faster emergency dispatch. Minutes saved in detection can mean lives saved.
What Academic Studies Reveal
Independent research confirms significant detection latency in traditional traffic data providers
Waze vs. INRIX Detection Speed Study
Amin-Naseri, M., Chakraborty, P., Sharma, A., Gilbert, S. B., & Hong, M. (2018)
Key Finding: Waze detected incidents 9.8 minutes faster than INRIX on average
95% CI: 8.25 to 11.36 minutes
- Time difference distribution was bell-shaped, centered around -0.22 minutes relative to ATMS
- Waze's crowdsourced model enables earlier detection than traditional probe-based systems
Transportation Research Record, 2672(43), 34–43
INRIX Detection Latency Analysis
Kim and Coifman (2014)
Key Finding: INRIX exhibited a latency of approximately 6 minutes
Compared to loop detector data
- Repeated reporting of the same speeds yielded an effective sampling period of 3–5 minutes
- INRIX confidence measures did not reflect the latency or repeated measures
- During a major 4+ hour incident, INRIX missed the event and reported speeds 30 mph higher than actual
Transportation Research Record: Comparing INRIX speed data against concurrent loop detector stations
Nebraska DOT Traffic Data Evaluation
Nebraska Department of Transportation Study
Key Finding: INRIX more reliable for recurring congestion than incident detection
- Probe-based systems struggle with non-recurring incident detection
- Traditional providers detect symptoms (slowdowns) not causes (incidents)
Detection Latency Comparison
Based on peer-reviewed research and official documentation
CV-powered real-time detection
Documented latency from loop detectors
Internal testing vs. Argus AI
9.8 min faster than INRIX
Untested/undocumented
Untested/undocumented
References:
[1] Kim and Coifman (2014). "Comparing INRIX speed data against concurrent loop detector stations." Transportation Research Record. INRIX exhibited ~6 minute latency vs. loop detectors.
[2] Internal testing (2024). TomTom incident detection latency measured at ~16 minutes behind Argus AI.
[3] Amin-Naseri, M., et al. (2018). "Evaluating the Reliability, Coverage, and Added Value of Crowdsourced Traffic Incident Reports from Waze." Transportation Research Record, 2672(43), 34–43. Waze detected incidents 9.8 minutes faster than INRIX.
[4] HERE: Untested/undocumented incident detection latency.
[5] Google Maps: Untested/undocumented incident detection latency.
The Argus AI Advantage
Why we're 50-90x faster than traditional providers
Traditional Providers
- ✗Rely on probe vehicle slowdowns to infer incidents
- ✗Wait for multiple data points to confirm
- ✗6-15+ minute inherent latency
- ✗Detect symptoms (congestion), not causes
Argus AI
- ✓Computer vision directly observes incidents
- ✓AI classifies incident type instantly
- ✓Sub-10 second detection and alerting
- ✓Detects the incident before congestion forms
Ready for Real-Time Traffic Intelligence?
Stop waiting minutes for incident data. Get alerts in under 10 seconds.