Highways England fires back at SVD accusations
An individual from the organisation has given exclusive info about the controversy regarding SVD tech.
Around a week ago, Highways Magazine published a scrutinising report in which they claimed that Highways England was developing a flawed system of stationary vehicle detection cameras, stating that in a 2016 trial the system passed the evaluation because 'some of the events for which alarms were not sent' were classified as detected. Had the system classified those events as missed detections, the system would have failed the evaluation.
A few days ago, an individual - whom I shall call 'Daniel' in order to protect his privacy - reached out to me and gave me information which put Highways Magazine accusations into question.
Here is what 'Daniel' stated:
"Unfortunately Highways Magazine has distorted the true picture on this one. 85% of stopped vehicles were detected by the system - well above the required detection rate in the trial. SVD did not only pass the evaluation "because a large number of 'events' were incorrectly classified as detected". Highways Magazine has inaccurately described the findings of the report."