Way closer to 8 to 10, once I finished :P I have a question, if you have visitorship numbers from other sources, is it possible to simply find out the error windows on those numbers?
You mentioned an event with 350K people. Hopefully there are other such events that have 'supposed" numbers associated with them. is it possible, on these smaller scales, to find out the deviation from wifi numbers? That would at least allow you to see if your numbers agree with or wildly deviate from the 75% number from the UK survey. Furthermore, can you use sampling tecniques to do this on the cheap? I'm sure you know more popular sections VS not. In fact, you could use existing wifi to tell you this. so, in certain areas to do the necessary leg work, but then use that to feed a larger model to validate and/or debunk your 12M number. In all seriousness, if your goal is not production, but rather limited data collection, is it out of the question to put conventional (even battery powered) presence detection devices in a few key places where you have at least one other form of ground truth e.g. a camera? My goal with any/all of these suggestions is to simply find out, eventually, which metric has higher accuracy. I am happy to be wrong, but with that many "bags of mostly water", I just don't buy that a wifi-based counting system that relies on back-scatter and reflection counting, with some phase calculations thrown in, is going to be worth anything other than maybe order of magnitude. Take care, Sina President, Prime Access Consulting, Inc. Twitter: @SinaBahram Company Website: http://www.pac.bz Personal Website: http://www.sinabahram.com Blog: http://blog.sinabahram.com -----Original Message----- From: mcn-l-boun...@mcn.edu [mailto:mcn-l-boun...@mcn.edu] On Behalf Of Nik Honeysett Sent: Thursday, December 01, 2016 7:46 PM To: mcn-l@mcn.edu Subject: Re: [MCN-L] Tapping the MCN Brain Trust Sina - that took 3 minutes? You’re awesome. Many thanks... Bruce - this is kind of thing I’m looking for - many thanks. Obviously, my friend is me. The accepted park visitorship is 12 million - no idea where this comes from. Institutional attendance (museums and zoo) reports in at about 6.5 million but there is double, triple and quadruple counting hiding in these numbers. I’m interested in whether the 12 million is accurate, so yes, interested in the joggers, dog walkers and picnickers, etc. I’m inclined to think the 12 million is inflated significantly. Its Ruckus equipment and we tried counting all devices in the area, but the differential between users on the wifi and devices wasn’t very big, so I didn’t trust it. However, if 75% of smartphone users are looking for free wifi (I thought it would be much lower), then maybe I should take another look at that number. We serve an average of 100K users per month on the wifi and tomorrow and saturday is our signature event when we’ll “officially" see 350K people in the park - no idea where this number comes from either, but like to support it it or debunk it. Thanks for the thoughts and data much appreciated. And while I’d love to use some drones, we’re on the SAN flight path and only a mile from the airport. -nik ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Nik Honeysett | Chief Executive Officer BALBOA PARK ONLINE COLLABORATIVE M (805) 402-3326 P (619) 331-1974 E nhoneys...@bpoc.org <mailto:nhoneys...@bpoc.org> 2131 Pan American Plaza, San Diego, CA 92101 A technology collaboration that connects audiences to art, culture and science. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ On Dec 1, 2016, at 4:18 PM, Sina Bahram <s...@sinabahram.com> wrote: I'm familiar with Mostofi's work, but wen I last looked at it, the out-door performance was far less accurate than in-door, due to not being able to rely on reflections, etc. When I googled it now, I notice casual references to outdoors. What I don't know is whether the team did further work, or whether they are simply echoing the original paper's comments, but not properly accounting for in-door VS out-door when it comes to accuracy? Take care, Sina President, Prime Access Consulting, Inc. Twitter: @SinaBahram Company Website: http://www.pac.bz Personal Website: http://www.sinabahram.com Blog: http://blog.sinabahram.com -----Original Message----- From: mcn-l-boun...@mcn.edu [mailto:mcn-l-boun...@mcn.edu] On Behalf Of Bruce Wyman Sent: Thursday, December 01, 2016 7:09 PM To: Museum Computer Network Listserv <mcn-l@mcn.edu> Subject: Re: [MCN-L] Tapping the MCN Brain Trust (huh, it looks like I use my personal email address for this listerv, this was my original message) Nik — It’s worth reaching out to these folks: <http://www.ece.ucsb.edu/~ymostofi/HeadCountingWithWiFi <http://www.ece.ucsb.edu/~ymostofi/HeadCountingWithWiFi>>. They may be able to give you the coarse estimator that you’re looking for even if they’ve patented their refined version. Aside from that, This survey out of the UK in 2014. <http://purple.ai/latest-survey-people-use-wifi-public-places/ <http://purple.ai/latest-survey-people-use-wifi-public-places/>> did a survey which indicates ~75% of people are looking for & using wifi. (mileage may vary, no idea the size of n or how biased the survey pool may have been) Additionally, the Wireless Broadband Association indicates that by 2017, 60% of carrier network traffic will be offloaded to Wi-Fi. And Pew Research last year indicates that 68% of adults have smartphones. <http://www.pcworld.com/article/2999631/phones/pew-survey-shows-68-percent-of-americans-now-own-a-smartphone.html <http://www.pcworld.com/article/2999631/phones/pew-survey-shows-68-percent-of-americans-now-own-a-smartphone.html>> (and another study that I can’t find at the moment suggests that 90% of smartphones have Wifi which seems low to me, but we’re quibbling at this point). So. 2/3 of the population have smartphones, 75% of those smartphone users are looking for free wifi, stringing together a few studies and looking at some tough commonality. That gets you somewhat close for estimate purposes. And then validate with a small tracking study and / or the UCSB folks in the first link. -bw. > On Dec 1, 2016, at 3:21 PM, Nik Honeysett <nhoneys...@bpoc.org > <mailto:nhoneys...@bpoc.org>> wrote: > > I have a friend who runs a large, free public-access wifi network in a park. > The network requires no authentication. There is modest promotion of the > availability of free-wifi. He’s looking to estimate the total number of > visitors to the park from the number of unique clients he sees on his wifi > network. Despite the fact that a significant proportion of visitors have > their smartphone with them, only a certain percentage will appear on the > network due to a variety of factors including phone settings and a user > checking to see whether there’s wifi available. > > What percentage of the total visitor number does the MCN brain trust think he > will see on his network? Or maybe put another way, what percentage of the > population looks for free wifi? > > -nik > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Bruce Wyman bwy...@teufelkind.net _______________________________________________ You are currently subscribed to mcn-l, the listserv of the Museum Computer Network (http://www.mcn.edu) To post to this list, send messages to: mcn-l@mcn.edu To unsubscribe or change mcn-l delivery options visit: http://mcn.edu/mailman/listinfo/mcn-l The MCN-L archives can be found at: http://www.mail-archive.com/mcn-l@mcn.edu/ _______________________________________________ You are currently subscribed to mcn-l, the listserv of the Museum Computer Network (http://www.mcn.edu) To post to this list, send messages to: mcn-l@mcn.edu To unsubscribe or change mcn-l delivery options visit: http://mcn.edu/mailman/listinfo/mcn-l The MCN-L archives can be found at: http://www.mail-archive.com/mcn-l@mcn.edu/
