Journal of Cleaner Production 262 (2020) 121181

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Cleaner Production

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jclepro

Smart Parking Sensors: State of the Art and Performance Evaluation

T. Perkovi


c a, *, P. Soli 
c b, H. Zargariasl b, D. Coko b
, Joel J.P.C. Rodrigues c, d
a
University Department of Forensic Sciences, University of Split, Croatia
b
Department of Electrical Engineering, FESB, University of Split, Croatia
c
Federal University of Piauí (UFPI), Teresina - PI, Brazil
d
Instituto de Telecomunicaço ~es, Portugal

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Smart parking systems present one of the essential infrastructure concepts that enable Internet of Things
Received 16 November 2019 (IoT) in Smart cities. Finding a free parking lot plays a role in reducing traffic congestion, gas emissions,
Received in revised form and increasing the quality of life of people living and working in it. Therein, the fundamental part of
28 January 2020
every smart parking system is the detection of vehicle presence, which is usually employed by devices
Accepted 16 March 2020
Available online 28 March 2020
comprised of power-hungry sensors. This paper gives an extension to state-of-the-art by a systematic in-
depth overview of technologies used for the smart parking detection realization consuming mW of
^ as de
Handling editor: Cecilia Maria Villas Bo power. Deeper insights on the real-scenario performances and power consumption of most popular
Almeida sensor devices and Low Power Wide Area (LPWA) radio technologies available today (LoRa, Sigfox and
NB-IoT) are provided. The results show that based on the architectures of IoT system, lowest con-
Keywords: sumption is for LoRa devices. Further, analysis of power consumption of commercial LPWA-based Smart
Sensor performance parking sensor device is provided along with battery estimation lifetime, which is especially important
Smart parking for the deployment of future smart parking solutions. Battery lifetime heavily depends on the number of
LPWA
parking lots exchanges and based on the less frequent changes, the estimated battery lifetime is
IoT power consumption
approximately 7 years. Inspired by the limitations of power-hungry and relatively expensive smart
parking sensor devices, two strategies for the optimization are proposed: first one is based on the
premise where a drop in received signal strength of the LPWA device can serve as the presence of the
vehicle in the parking lot, while the second one proposes a big picture on a novel architecture for har-
vesting the surrounding energy and using the same for circuitry wake-up therefore saving the energy.
© 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction by knowing that approximately 30% of daily traffic congestion is

One of the most important topics addressed by the European
Commission and most nations in the world is the development of
an urban city model aimed at increasing the quality of life of people
working and living in them. Smart and Sustainable Mobility is one
of the central concepts in the vision of the Smart City, where
Internet of Things plays very important role (Perkovi
c et al., 2019;
Nizetic et al., 2019).
Fundamental problem underlying the Smart City concept is the
reduction of traffic congestion in the city. Considering the fact that
on average drivers spend about 7.8 min finding a free parking space,
major contributor to reducing traffic congestion would be to
develop smart parking systems aimed at finding a free parking
space more efficiently. Such problems are even more emphasized
* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: toperkov@unist.hr (T. Perkovi

c).
caused by drivers looking for a free parking space (Geng and
Cassandras, 2013). All this further increases the drivers’ frustra-
tion with accomplishing daily activities, but moreover, it dramati-
cally increases fuel consumption which contributes to the air
pollution in crowded cities.
Recent advances of wireless sensor networks, along with low-
cost sensor devices, Web technology and pervasive computing
gained momentum to the expansion of IoT ecosystem (Bibri, 2018;
Cruz et al., 2019). Combined with big data analytics, IoT started to
stimulate the advancement of solutions that enhance and/or
complement car traffic monitoring, especially in overpopulated
cities aimed at increasing smart sustainable mobility (Zanella et al.,
2014). In recent years, a number of solutions have been proposed
aimed at resolving the problem of finding free parking spaces
aimed at establishing a green environment and increasing the
quality of life in Smart cities (Lin et al., 2017; Kotb et al., 2016).
In essence, the majority of these solutions are based on a mobile
application through which users receive information about free

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.121181
0959-6526/© 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
2 T. Perkovi
c et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 262 (2020) 121181
parking spaces (Fig. 1). These solutions range from Parking Guid-
ance and Information (PGI) to even Parking Reservations (PRS)
Systems delivering information to the drivers over the Internet
about available parking space (Kotb et al., 2017). By taking into
account the distance and the total number of free places in a
parking lot a mobile application will automatically find a free
parking lot using metrics at the least price (Pham et al., 2015).
Within the context of IoT, the implementation of solutions for
the detection of free parking lots is based on the implementation of
devices that can sense the environment (in this case the presence of
vehicles) and send this data to a central server for further pro-
cessing (e.g. via radio channel). Selection of the appropriate sensor
device for vehicle detection rather depends on the requirements of
parking lot, focusing at solutions that preserve high accuracy while
reducing the overall cost (Al-Turjman and Malekloo, 2019).
Depending on the existence of external power source, these sensor
devices can be classified into active and passive ones. These devices
(sensors) range from light sensors, distance sensors based on either
infrared or ultrasound, magnetometers, and even combinations of


different sensor devices (Soli c et al., 2019; Lin et al., 2017). Passive
infrared sensors work as heat detectors from surrounding objects,
while the vehicle passes in the vicinity of the sensor device (Kotb
et al., 2017). Active infrared sensor device estimate the distance
between the sensor device and a surrounding object in front of
them (Lin et al., 2017). On the other hand, ultrasound sensors
measure round-trip time of ultrasound reflected from an object
positioned in front of them (Al-Turjman, 2018). Cameras with video
analysis can also be employed to detect the presence of vehicles
placed in a parking lots (Wahyono and Jo, 2017). Magnetometers
detect the change in magnetic field once the vehicle (metallic ob-
ject) passes above them (Arab and Nadeem, 2017). Light Dependent
Resistor detect luminous intensity change, while piezoelectric
sensors detect vehicle passing over from the pressure/vibration of
the vehicle (Al-Turjman, 2018). Although sensor device manufac-
turers guarantee several years of lifetime for mostly battery-
powered devices, the consumption of radio front-end, the sensors
themselves, and microcontrollers make them extremely power
hungry. However, compared to their functionalities such sensors
are rather expensive.
Nevertheless, from the perspective of end user, parking space
status, i.e. occupied or available, can be coded with only one bit of
information. On such basis, this paper describes an overview of
sensing technologies used for detecting the occupancy of parking
lots focusing on performances of most popular sensors used
Fig. 1. Smart parking sensor devices communicate with network server/cloud using a
gateway (multiple gateways can be used). From there, network server forwards
incoming data for visualization.
nowadays as well as their power consumption analysis. In partic-
ular, to extend existing contributions, this paper provides an
analysis on the performance of the photodiode, Light-dependent
resistor (LDR), Infrared LED, Ultrasonic, LiDAR and magnetic sen-
sors. The data is delivered in terms of vehicle presence, accuracy
and power consumption that can be easily transferred as a feasi-
bility information to integrate in smart parking sensors. Moreover,
performances of a LPWA radio communication technology, such as
such, as LoRa, NB-IoT and Sigfox (Centenaro et al., 2016; Raza et al.,
2017), used in smart parking detection systems today are provided
in terms of power consumption and availability. As a case study,
performances of a commercial LoRaWAN Smart parking system are
provided to better understand power requirements/protocols of
smart parking devices used today. To cope with the power con-
sumption issues, two strategies for the optimization are proposed.
First one shows that information on the received signal strength of
the LPWA device could serve as an indicator of the occupancy,
where a drop in signal strength can be detected on the receiving
side when the vehicle is located above the sensor device (Solic et al.,
2019). The premise is based on a simple but effective principle:
being placed in the parking lot, the device is provided with a radio
front-end that is detuned by the presence of the electromagneti-
cally harsh environment, i.e. vehicle. Second one proposes a novel
device that compensates expensive, mainly battery-operated and
power hungry LPWA-based smart parking sensors. In particular, a
big picture on novel architecture for harvesting the surrounding
energy and using the same for circuitry wake-up therefore saving
the energy is proposed.
The objective of this work is to analyze off-the-shelf sensor
devices that can be used for building the smart parking node de-
vices in terms of their detection accuracy and power consumption.
In addition, the power requirements of commercial and most
prominent LPWA technologies are also investigated, such as LoRa,
Sigfox and NB-IoT, that can be used as a radio interface for building
the same smart parking devices. In depth analysis of commercial
LPWA smart parking detector in terms of consumption and lifetime
duration is also provided. The related parameters affecting the
power consumption resulted in two potential strategies that may
extend battery lifetime of smart parking sensor device.
2. Sensing the occupancy - smart parking sensor
Performance Evaluation
Smart parking systems hold their place as one of the essential
infrastructures that enable Internet of Things in Smart cities. Hence,
the fundamental part of the system lies in the vehicle detection
placed in the parking lot. In this section a range of sensing tech-
nologies is introduced for the detection of parking lots. More
particularly, focus is placed on the most popular sensor devices
used in real parking scenario, such as a photodiode, ultrasound,
infrared, magnetometer, and Time-of-Flight sensors. At the end, in
depth analysis of power consumption of sensor devices is provided
along with battery estimation lifetime, which is especially impor-
tant for the deployment of smart parking sensor devices.
2.1. Smart parking sensor detection
For the purpose of evaluating the performance of sensor devices
used in smart parking environments, including the power con-
sumption, we utilized the following sensors: magnetometer
HMC5883L ,1 IR sensor, Time-of-flight WAVGAT VL53L0X, Light
Dependent Resistor, Photodiode and Ultrasound HC-SR04 which
1
https://www.farnell.com/datasheets/1683374.pdf.
 T. Perkovi
c et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 262 (2020) 121181 3

Fig. 2. Smart parking sensor devices connected to Arduino Nano board.

were connected to the Arduino Nano board (Fig. 2) operating at 5 V.

First, sensor devices were placed in several open/free parking lots
to gather sensor information about a free parking lot. After that,
sensor devices were placed on the ground below several vehicles
with various distance chassis to obtain sensor information status.
As can be seen in Fig. 3, 1023 presents the max. value that the
analog-to-digital converter can give on the output (10-bit ADC
converter) which indicates that the photodiode is in saturation.
When photodiode enters saturation, it can be assumed as an open
parking space. However, some measurements indicate an open
parking space (value 1023) although the vehicle is placed above the
photodiode. It is assumed that the reflections of the light from the
surrounding vehicles increase the light level received by the
photodiode.
During the calibration procedure, ultrasound detector showed
values around 140, as can be seen in Fig. 4 (left). Unfortunately,
during the experiments in realistic scenario, some measurement
showed false predictions (smaller than the threshold value). This
indicates that the used ultrasound sensor can not be reliable in
Fig. 3. Sensing vehicle presence by Photo-diode.
every vehicle detection.
Fig. 4(right) states that the LiDAR, as a sensor, can be considered
as a good candidate so that the absence of a vehicle is explicitly 2.2. Power consumption analysis
shown. There is not any reference line because the sensor issues a
message of “Out of range” for empty parking lots. In order to compare the power consumption of these sensors,
In some scenarios it can be seen that measurement output from sensor devices were connected to an Arduino Nano device running
a sensor device indicates free parking space, although the sensor is a different sketch for each individual sensor. The power con-
placed under the vehicle. Particularly, the measurement results sumption was derived from average voltage and current supplying
from the magnetometer and Infra-red sensor in some measure- the Arduino Nano at the þ5 V pin. An LED was connected to digital
ments indicate a non-occupied parking lot (Figs. 5 and 6). These output D3 as an indication of an object. A different threshold value
inaccurate results largely depend on the distance between the was set for each individual scenario.
chassis and the ground, along with metallic structure of the chassis. Photodiode (visible spectrum). The photodiode was connected
As can be seen, if sensor devices are placed from the sensor device, from the þ5 V pin through a 10 k U pull-down resistor to GND. The
a larger likelihood of inaccurate parking lot occupancy will be ob- voltage drop on the resistor was measured at analog input A1. A
tained (see Fig. 7). threshold for indication of an object was set to 900 ADC units,
In next section power consumption requirements are provided turning the LED on when the photodiode was completely shaded.
which define research directions that may lead to the further The average measured current consumption was 13.47 mA at a
optimization of the sensing devices. supply voltage value of 5.52 V, which yields an average power
4 T. Perkovi
c et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 262 (2020) 121181

Fig. 4. Sensing vehicle presence by (left) Ultrasound detector and (right) LiDAR. The read message via LiDAR is “Out of Range” in any open lot.

Fig. 5. Output of magnetometers sensor devices placed at the parking lot.

Fig. 6. Output of IR proximity detector placed at the parking lot.

consumption of 74.35 mW.
Light-dependent resistor (LDR). The LDR was connected from
the þ5 V pin through a 1 k U pull-down resistor to GND. The voltage
drop on the resistor was measured at analog input A0. A threshold
for indication of an object was set to 650 ADC units, turning the LED
on when the LDR was completely shaded. The average measured
current consumption was 18.85 mA at a supply voltage value of
5.47 V, which yields an average power consumption of 103.11 mW.
Infrared LED and photodiode. The photodiode was connected
from the þ5 V pin through a 330 U pull-down resistor to GND. The
voltage drop on the resistor was measured at analog input A3. An
infrared LED was connected from digital pin D7 through a 330 U
pull-down resistor to GND. The ambient infrared light was
measured, stored and subtracted from the result to increase the
accuracy of the system. In this manner only the infrared light re-
flected from the obstacle was taken into account. A threshold for
 T. Perkovi
c et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 262 (2020) 121181
Fig. 7. Laboratory setup comprised of sensor devices with microcontroller and metallic
plate.
indication of an object was set to 30 ADC units. The average
measured current consumption was 19.42 mA at a supply voltage
value of 5.46 V, which yields an average power consumption of
106.03 mW.
Ultrasonic sensor. The HC-SR04 ultrasonic sensor was con-
nected to the Arduino Nano (trigger to pin D2, echo to pin D1). The
emitted ultrasonic pulse length was set to 10 ms A threshold for
indication of an object was set to 100, corresponding to approx.
10 cm distance. The average measured current consumption was
16.25 mA at a supply voltage value of 5.49 V, which yields an
average power consumption of 89.21 mW.
LiDAR sensor. The Vl53L0X micro smart LiDAR sensor was
connected to the Arduino Nano via I2C bus. A threshold for indi-
cation of an object was set to 200, corresponding to approx. 10 cm
distance. The average measured current consumption was
27.31 mA at a supply voltage value of 5.29 V, which yields an
average power consumption of 144.47 mW.
3-axis magnetic sensor. The QMC5883 3-axis magnetic sensor
was connected to the Arduino Nano via I2C bus. Only the z-axis
value was read. A threshold for indication of an object was set to
2800. The average measured current consumption was 14.98 mA at
a supply voltage value of 5.51 V, which yields an average power
consumption of 82.54 mW.
The measurement results show that the minimal power con-
sumption can be obtained when using a photodiode (in the visible
spectrum). This is due to the operating principle of the photodiode,
as it is reverse biased so the current through the diode is very small,
almost negligible. This mode of operation (often called photocon-
ductive as opposed to photovoltaic in forward-bias) also causes the
voltage drop on the pull-down resistor to have almost linear
dependence on the illumination of the diode. Unfortunately, the
vehicle occupancy measurement results indicate that photodiode,
although gives the best results in terms of consumption, does not
output good quality vehicle presence results. The second best
sensor in terms of power consumption is the 3-axis magnetic
sensor, followed by the ultrasonic sensor. The other sensors that
were tested exhibited a power consumption above 100 mW for 5 V
input.
3. Power requirements of commercial LPWA technologies
In this section comparison between three LPWA technologies is
given: Sigfox, NB-IoT and LoRaWAN. Three boards from the same
5
manufacturer were selected. Specification of every LPWA node is
given below, which is followed by measurements of power con-
sumption. The results of measurements will give us a direction into
selecting the most appropriate LPWA technology suitable for our
needs, taking into account power consumption.
Table 1 gives a comparison of MKR-based LPWA boards that
were used for test setup: MKR WAN 1300 (LoRa Connectivity), MKR
FOX 1200 (Sigfox) and MKR NB 1500 (NB-IoT). All three boards are
based on Atmel SAMD21 Cortex-M0 32-bit low power ARM MCU.
MKR WAN 1300 uses Murata CMWX1ZZABZ2 LoRa module pow-
ered with operating Voltage 3.3 V. MKR FOX 1200 uses Atmel
ATA85203 single-chip Sigfox RF transmitter with circuit operating
voltage 3.3 V, while MKR NB 1500 with U-Blox SARA-R410M-02 B4
modem and operating Voltage 3.3 V.
Fig. 8 shows test setup used for our measurement. Every board
has Micro U.FL connector for antenna connection. In our case we
used the antenna with 5dbi Gain and SMA Male Connector. To
measure current consumption, every board was connected to
Current Ranger, and powered from external power supply of 3.4 V.
An oscilloscope was connected to Current Ranger to capture
detailed measurements of current consumption. In addition, the
Anritsu MS2711E spectrum analyzer was utilized to capture chan-
nel power, central frequency for every node and occupied band-
width. In our code ArduinoLowPower library was utilized to get our
board periodically into deep sleep.
3.1. Measurement results
Fig. 9 shows the power consumption for LoRaWAN, Sigfox and
NB-IoT development boards that were captured on the oscilloscope.
To measure consumption of every device, output of Current Raider
was connected to the oscilloscope. The output of the signal was
saved in a CSV file and further filtered in Matlab using a moving
average filter. As can be seen, all development boards have signif-
icant consumption in sleep mode (e.g. more than 1.6 mA for LoR-
aWAN module). Such a high consumption is due to soldering
problem, and many forums discuss how to decrease consumption
by inserting hardware changes into the board, or in some scenarios,
modules such as low power TPL5110 is suggested that completely
cuts off the consumption to the board.5 Consumption from LoR-
aWAN module during transmission is around 35 mA, with 1.12 dBm
output power and central frequency 850 MHz (Fig. 10(left)). Both
transmission and reception time period last no longer than 3 s. It
can be noted that both TX and RX period depend on the spreading
factor and bandwidth window. In the scenario shown in Fig. 9, for
choosing parameters SF9BW125 airtime was around 206 ms6. In
active mode, it may be noted that Sigfox module transmits message
three times, which is characterized by Sigfox specification, and
consumption is larger than 45 mA during the transmission period.
Besides sending three messages it seems that prior going to sleep
the device spends a large portion of time waiting for a message
from the base station which significantly increases the overall po-
wer consumption. Even if Sigfox device does not check for down-
link messages, active period during TX will be around 15 s. Anritsu
MS2711E spectrum analyzer measures the output power around
12.8 dBm with central frequency 868 MHz (Fig. 10(center)). At the
2
https://wireless.murata.com/pub/RFM/data/type_abz.pdf.
3
http://ww1.microchip.com/downloads/en/devicedoc/atmel-9372-smart-rf-
ata8520_datasheet.pdf.
4
https://www.u-blox.com/sites/default/files/SARA-R4_DataSheet_%28UBX-
16024152%29.pdf.
5
TPL5110 datasheet: http://www.ti.com/lit/ds/symlink/tpl5110.pdf.
6
https://avbentem.github.io/lorawan-airtime-ui/ttn/eu868/13.
6 T. Perkovi
c et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 262 (2020) 121181

Table 1
Comparison of different LPWA development boards.

MKR WAN 1300 (LoRa) MKR FOX 1200 (Sigfox) MKR NB 1500 (NB-IoT)

Manufacturer Arduino Arduino Arduino

Core SAMD21 ARM Cortex SAMD21 ARM Cortex M0þ SAMD21 ARM Cortex M0þ
M0þ
Clock Speed 32.768 kHz (RTC), 32.768 kHz (RTC), 48 MHz 32.768 kHz (RTC), 48 MHz
48 MHz
Board Power Supply 3.3 V 3.3 V 3.3 V
Working region EU EU (RCZ1) EU
Frequency 863e870 MHz Uplink center frequency 868.130 MHz, Downlink center frequency B3 (1800 MHz), B8 (900 MHz) and B20
869.525 MHz (800 MHz)
Radio modem Murata CMWX1ZZABZ Atmel ATA8520 U-Blox SARA-R410M-02 B
Antenna power 2 dB 2 dB 2 dB
Current Consumption (in 128 mA 45 mA 20e60 mA (max. 190 mA)
TX)
TX period 3s 15 s 5e10 s

Fig. 8. LPWA development boards connected to external power supply and Current Ranger to measure consumption in active and inactive mode: (left) MKR WAN 1300 - LoRa
module, (center) MKR FOX 1200 - Sigfox (right) MKR NB 1500 - NB-IoT.

Fig. 9. Consumption of LPWA development boards based on (left) LoRaWAN (center) Sigfox and (right) NB-IoT technology.

Fig. 10. Output power of Anritsu MS2711E spectrum analyzer for (left) LoRaWAN (center) Sigfox radio and (right) NB-IoT technology.
 T. Perkovi
c et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 262 (2020) 121181 7

Fig. 11. Network architecture of Libelium Smart Parking sensors.

end, NB-IoT consumption shows to be very large during active

period, larger than 20 mA on average for the period of 5e10 s, with
spikes going over 65 mA during transmission. Anritsu MS2711E
spectrum analyzer measures the output power around 15 dBm with
central frequency 848 MHz (Fig. 10(right)). Note that in the sleep
period microcontroller is in power-down mode, while radio is
constantly powered and not switched off. Regardless, in active
mode consumption is larger than both LoRaWAN and Sigfox tech-
nology. In conclusion, LoRaWAN currently presents as the best
LPWA technology since it is infrastructure independent (both for
end device and gateway device), can be “easily” installed, and po-
wer consumption is by far smallest compared to other LPWA
technologies.

4. Analysis of commercial LPWA parking detection systems

In this section details for connecting Libelium LoRaWAN-based

Smart parking sensor devices are provided. Although Libelium
suggests Loirot as a LoRaWAN provider, good experience as well as Fig. 12. Libelium Smart Parking sensor device.
documentation provided by The Things Network (TTN) LoRaWAN
system motivated us to pursue in establishing a connection of
Smart Parking sensor devices to their cloud system. Moreover, TTN
allows us to forward all messages from Libelium smart parking
sensor to our personal server comprising Node-RED, InfluxDB and
Grafana services for visualization and further processing. Fig. 11
shows the architecture of our Libelium Smart Parking system.
First step is to obtain LoRaWAN configuration parameters, i.e.
parameters for LoRaWAN OTAA (Over the Air Authentication)
protocol - Device EUI, Application EUI and App Key. To accomplish
this, it is necessary to connect Libelium Smart Parking sensor device
to the PC via USB cable and switch the node in the Boot mode
(Fig. 12). Smart Parking devices already come with preloaded pa-
rameters, and they are essential since they have to be identical to A flow was created in Node-RED on our server side where the
the parameters configured in The Things Network cloud application first block establishes connection to TTN, specifically, to the previ-
for the given sensor device. To accomplish this, Libelium offers ously created application in TTN cloud that receives messages from
Smart Devices App written in the Java language for programming of the Libelium Smart Parking device. After that, all received messages
their parking sensor devices. are parsed and prepared for the InfluxDB. Next, Grafana was used to
After obtaining OTAA parameters from the device using Libel- connect to the InfluxDB for displaying received data as they appear
ium Smart Devices App, in TTN console (https://console. in the database. Fig. 13(left) shows parking lot status for 5 sensor
thethingsnetwork.org) user creates an application and configures devices while Fig. 13(right) shows RSSI of packets received during
the parameters to match OTAA parameters in Libelium Smart De- the period of 12 h from one device. As can be seen, when a vehicle is
vices App. After that, user disconnects Smart Parking sensor from placed above the sensor device, a drop in RSSI is detected on the
the computer, switches to App mode and pushes Reset button to receiving side, which could serve as an indicator of the occupancy.
start with the OTAA protocol with The Things Network base station.
Decoding the messages. Libelium has a very detailed descrip- 4.1. Consumption and lifetime estimation
tion about payload coding in their documentation, which allowed
us to create our own decoder. As can be seen in Table 2, Upload To estimate the lifetime of sensor device Libelium smart parking
message payload comprises 11 bytes, out of which first 2 bytes sensor was connected to the Current Ranger, whereas Current
correspond to the header byte, while 9 correspond to the payload Ranger was connected to the Oscilloscope to capture detailed
itself. For example, bit 7 of 0 header byte corresponds to the parking measurements of current consumption. Fig. 14(left) shows con-
lot status, while bits 0e3 of header byte 0 correspond to the Frame sumption during the OTAA authentication procedure captured by
Type (such as start frame, info frame or keep-alive frame - Table 2). the oscilloscope. Similarly, as explained in Libelium documentation
Next, we give an example of a payload format decoder created in (Table 2(right)), after OTAA authentication, Smart Parking device
The Things Network console for our application. sends Start frame 1, which is followed by Start frame 2. After that,
8 T. Perkovi
c et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 262 (2020) 121181

Fig. 13. (left) Parking status of 5 Libelium parking sensor devices (right) RSSI captured on four LoRaWAN gateways from one Libelium Parking sensor device.

Info frame is sent. Next, sensor device enters sleep where radio
module and microcontroller (MCU) are powered off. The device
periodically wakes up and activates internal sensor devices (radar,
magnetometer) for checking the change in parking status. In the
current consumption snapshot shown in Fig. 14(right) sensor
clearly wakes up every 60 s. If parking lot status changes (from free
goes to occupied), sensor device will send a LoRaWAN message
over the radio to the gateway as can be seen in Fig. 14(left), which
will result in increase of current consumption. The consumption of
sensors and the MCU is slightly larger than 100 mA, along with
LoRa transmission it goes over 150 mA. While MCU is in sleep state,
the overall consumption is around 0.01 A (Fig. 15). In Libelium
documentation, Smart Parking nodes have an expected lifetime up
to ten years of uninterrupted operation, which is assumed under
normal circumstances and depending on settings of the smart
parking sensor device (night operation work regime, keep-alive
packet transmission period, frequency of parking lot change sta-
tus, etc.).
For example, Libelium smart parking sensors are equipped with
built-in lithium-thionyl chloride (Li-SOCl2) batteries with an
overall capacity of 10.4 Ah. Assuming that device consumption
during the sleep period (mA) is 0.01 mA, while device consumption
during wake period is on average 100 mA, with 1 LoRaWAN keep-
alive message sent per hour and 5 s wake-up duration on average,
an estimated battery lifetime will be around 2474.11 days, or 6.78
years. In this calculation it is assumed that the capacity is auto-
matically derated by 15% from 10.4 Ah to account for some self
discharge. Note that periodic MCU wake-up (around every minute),
as well as frequent parking lot status changes and this LoRa radio
communication will significantly reduce sensor lifetime duration,
and they were not taken into this preliminary calculation. Also,
nighttime regime where LoRaWAN keep-alive messages can be
sent less frequently were also not taken into account in battery
lifetime estimation.
5. Strategies for optimization of smart parking sensor devices
To cope with the power consumption issues introduced in
previous sections, in this section two strategies for the optimization
are proposed. First strategy shows how information on the received
signal strength of the LPWA device could serve as an indicator of
the occupancy, where a drop in signal strength can be detected on
the receiving side when the vehicle is located above the sensor
device. Second one proposes a novel device that compensates
expensive, mainly battery-operated and power hungry LPWA-
based smart parking sensors.

Fig. 14. (left) Libelium Smart Parking sensor consumption during the initial OTAA connection to the gateway. (right) Libelium Smart Parking sensor consumption between two
microcontroller wakeup periods.
 T. Perkovi
c et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 262 (2020) 121181 9

Table 2
(left) Libelium Smart Parking sensor packet header, (right) Uplink frames types.

Byte Bit Field Frame type num Description

0 7 Parking lot status Start frame 1 4 First frame sent by the node when starting with params settings
0 6 Battery state Start frame 2 5 Second frame sent by the node when starting with param settings
0 5 Configuration uplink acknowledgment Info frame 0 Inform about parking status change
0 4 Sensor recalibration Keep-alive frame 1 Device working since last reported status
0 3e0 Frame type Configuration uplink 2 Confirmation whether configuration downlink was applied
1 7e0 Sequence number RTC update request 7 Request for RTC sync once every day

Fig. 16. Test setup for the analysis of LPWA data composed of NB-IoT, Sigfox and LoRa
devices.

parser block, that prepared message for further storage in InfluxDB,

Fig. 15. Consumption of Libelium Smart Parking sensor with Current Raider in sleep
mode.
5.1. RSSI as an indicator of occupancy
In this section analysis of signals from the LPWA devices
installed in the parking lot, namely NB-IoT, Sigfox and LoRaWAN, is
presented. Arduino LPWA modules introduced in Section 3 were
used that incorporate LoRa, Sigfox and NB-IoT radio communica-
tion modules. Fig. 16 shows the setup tested all of the above
modules. To store the data sent by the device, a server was created
that implements Node-Red service, InfluxDB database and Grafana
for visualization of the collected data. In the following section ar-
chitecture for every LPWA technology is described.
5.1.1. Technology used to analyze LPWA signals
As NB-IoT technology is based on existing LTE infrastructure
from telecom operators, where it is necessary to obtain a SIM card
from a telecom operator supporting NB-IoT infrastructure to
establish connection with it. In our implementation T-Com oper-
ator was used for NB-IoT. Fig. 17(up) shows the architecture of the
NB-IoT implementation. As shown, MQTT protocol service was used
to send data to our server. In particular, MKR NB 1500 device
periodically sent/published messages via MQTT protocol to a pub-
licly available broker (mosquitto.com) to the topic fesb/LPWA/rssi.
On the server side, Node-RED subscribed to all messages on the
previously mentioned topic that reached the broker. Furthermore,
all received messages from MQTT block were forwarded to the
which can be further used for analysis and/or visualization in
Grafana.
Sigfox, similarly to NB-IoT, uses existing base stations provided
by supporting operators. After registering the device, Sigfox gives
users access to their cloud system for further processing of mes-
sages received over base station. The implementation architecture
of Sigfox system is given in Fig. 17(center). As can be seen, once the
message is sent over the radio from end device, base station for-
wards it to the Sigfox backend. Sigfox backend, on the other hand,
implements the callback functions that allow message forwarding
to other services (e.g. email, IFTTT, thinger.io etc.). HTTP integration
was used to forward messages to ThingerIO cloud, that acts as
bridge between Sigfox backend and our server, since our server is
not on a public IP address. Finally, a flow was created in Node-RED
to capture messages from ThingerIO. More specifically, first block
periodically hits HTTP GET message to receive response from
ThingerIO cloud. The received message is forwarded towards report
by exception (RBE) block that forwards the message only if it differs
from the previously received. This block is used to filter out
duplicate messages received at different time intervals. Next, the
message is parsed and prepared for storage in InfluxDB.
Finally, LoRaWAN in our example utilizes The Things Network
cloud system that implements both Application and Network
server. Fig. 17(down) shows the network architecture of our LoR-
aWAN system. In our example, MKR WAN 1300 was used. As a
LoRaWAN base station, an indoor base station close to the parking
lot in our university building was deployed. In our scenario, LoR-
aWAN implements the functionalities of The Things Network base
station, and forwards all received packets to the Network and
Application server provided by The Things Network (TTN). Flow
was created in Node-RED on the server side where the first block
establishes connection to The Things Network, specifically, to the
previously created application in TTN cloud that receives messages
from the MKR WAN end device.
5.1.2. Acquired data
This section presents preliminary results of the analysis of RSSI
signals collected from the environment. The test setup was
designed in such a way that a parking lot was tested at a nearby
10 T. Perkovi
c et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 262 (2020) 121181

Fig. 17. Network architecture of (up) NB-IoT, (center) Sigfox and (down) LoRaWAN implementation.

parking lot and information of the RSSI was collected in InfluxDB.
Every device periodically sent messages over the radio. The signals
were sent under conditions with and without vehicle presence in
the parking lot. In Fig. 18 RSSI from Sigfox and LoRaWAN devices is
displayed. NB-IoT has proven to be extremely unreliable and was
discarded from the observations. Under laboratory conditions, the
signal strength was 99 dBm, while at the parking lot the commu-
nication was unreliable and thus the graph was omitted from
further analysis. Interestingly, in situation where the vehicle is
present in the parking lot, RSSI is on average smaller than in the
situation when the parking lot is vacant. This is more visible for
LoRaWAN technology than for Sigfox. These results are under-
standable given that the propagation effects and obstacles are less
expressed for the LoRaWAN since base station is located near the
parking lot (30 m from the parking lot), compared to the Sigfox base
station placed at least 10 km from the parking lot. This indicates
that the drop in signal strength can serve as an indicator of vehicle
presence, without any requirement for complex and expensive
sensor devices.
5.2. Requirements for developing a novel device
Performance restrictions of long range radios and other IoT
sensing devices is caused by the limited energy source (De Donno
and Tarricone, 2013). Frequent transmissions require IoT node to
be wake, sense the data and use power-hungry radio interface of a
long range. The batteries, including self-draining issue would last
for a couple of years that puts great restrictions for a usage scenario,
since replacements would be a heavy task. In any case - energy
source, i.e. the batteries represent a major drawback for IoT-enabled
environment. In order to compensate the needs, in this section we
propose a novel IoT device that should be:
 event driven and consume the energy peaks only during active
state
 triggered to wake-up once the environmental change happen.
This action should be near zero-energy procedure
 multiple-source energy harvesting enabled
 energy efficient in the way to match device duty cycle

Fig. 18. Analyzed RSSI from LPWA devices (left) Sigfox, (right) LoRaWAN.
 T. Perkovi
c et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 262 (2020) 121181
Fig. 19. Wake-up trigger and Energy harvesting architecture.
 long distance. Coverage of many low-range readers cause heavy
infrastructure needs, while backscattering appears to be faulty
and the technology itself is not yet mature enough
 compatible for providing the information for training in ma-
chine learning techniques.
The aforementioned drawbacks could be partially compensated
by accumulating the available energy into the storage and enable
the system for later use. However, the most important part of the
architecture, is the “Control unit” depicted in Fig. 19. The aim of the
device is to use energy source inputs, when above the threshold to a
wake-up the power hungry circuitry of a generic IoT node. The
control unit will deliver the energy to energy storage element,
developed by means of rechargeable batteries or capacitors. The
voltage of IoT device is then regulated by Low Dropout (LDO)
voltage regulator. It is important to note that this system should be
able to match the power requirements of related duty cycle and the
node itself. That case would result with a sustainable device that
delivers data once the energy is present, and is even being more
efficient as the wake-ups are triggered by the environmental
change.
6. Related work
A plethora of solutions exists that utilize sensors for the detec-
tion of parking place. Infrared sensors implemented in the context
of smart parking solutions can be active and passive. For example,
passive infrared sensors work as detectors of heat from surround-
ing objects, such as humans passing in the vicinity of the sensor
device, i.e. parking lot (Someswar et al., 2017; Song et al., 2008).
These types of sensor device are normally combined with other
sensors in terms of vehicle detection. For example, in (Larisis et al.,
2012) combination of passive infrared sensor (PIR) and magne-
tometer is employed for vehicle presence detection. Using the
active infrared sensor device an estimation of distance is measured
between the sensor device and a surrounding object in front of
them (Moguel et al., 2014).
11
On the other hand, an ultrasound sensor measures ultrasound
round-trip reflected from an object positioned in front of them. This
way, an ultrasound sensor device is more suitable for outdoor en-
vironments as it estimates the distance between obstacles (Lee
et al., 2008; Coric and Gruteser, 2013). In addition, these sensor
devices can be useful to calculate vehicle speed as well as the
number of vehicles (Kianpisheh et al., 2012).
Accelerometers are also applied in smart parking solutions for
vehicle detection as they measure ground vibrations for detecting
the vehicle approaching the parking spot. Merged with other
sensor devices, such as optical sensors, a better estimation of
vehicle presence could be obtained (Gharaibeh et al., 2017). In
(Jeffrey et al., 2012) ambient light sensor is used to detect the
presence of the vehicle.
The majority of todays smart parking sensor devices for the
sensing of vehicle at the parking spot use magnetometers that
detect metal within the change of the magnetic field when an
object is placed within their vicinity .7 In (Arab and Nadeem, 2017)
smartphone magnetometers are utilized for detecting vehicles
placed at the parking lot.
Cameras can also be used for parking occupancy detection as
they require more complex image processing in real-time (Nguyen
and Nguyen, 2014; Sevillano et al., 2014). Using spatiotemporal
video analysis cameras are also used to detect the presence of ve-
hicles parked in street lanes (Wahyono and Jo, 2017). (Bulan et al.,
2013) introduced camera-based system for the detection of park-
ing occupancy that operates in real-time. In (Bong et al., 2011)
introduce Car Park Occupancy Information System (COINS) that
uses image processing techniques for occupied/available parking
lot. Similarly (Almeida et al., 2015), use a large dataset of figures
with Local Binary Patterns and Local Phase Quantization, along
with Support Vector Machine classifier for parking lot vacancy
detection. Other sensor devices, such as piezoelectric sensors and/
7
“China Parking,” www.chinaparking.org, “SmartSantander,” www.
smartsantander.eu, “LA ExpressPark,” www.laexpresspark.org.
12 T. Perkovi
c et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 262 (2020) 121181
or inductive loops are used in roads for detecting a passing vehicle
(Kotb et al., 2017). At the end, RFID as a technology can be also used
in smart parking systems, mostly for payments (Abdullah et al.,
2013; Zhao, 2012). In (Bagula et al., 2015), RFID is used as a
replacement for paper-based ticketing.
After detecting the occupancy or reading the sensor, smart
parking sensor nodes transmit information to the centralized sys-
tems. Usually, a wireless technology is utilized in smart parking
systems, ranging from short to wide range radio technologies such
as: Wi-Fi ZigBee/DigiMesh, Bluetooth/BLE, or long-range, like LoRa,
Sigfox, NB-IoT/LTE-M and Ingenu (de Carvalho Silva et al., 2017;
Raza et al., 2017). Compared to short range radio technology such as
WiFi and/or ZigBee, where multihop radio communication channel
is employed for information transmission to the base station, long
range radio systems found in LoRa or Sigfox use single hop
communication channel which in many cases makes them suitable
for smart parking solutions.
7. Conclusion
In the near future almost 70 percent of humans will live in urban
areas. Taking into account that in large cities, even today an average
driver has to spend a large portion of time to find a free parking lot,
in the overall it increases street congestion which rises fuel con-
sumption that contributes to air pollution. Smart and Sustainable
Mobility with the enormous advancement of IoT presents one of
the visions of Smart Cities. In this vein, the development of IoT-
based Smart Parking solutions, especially in overpopulated areas
will improve the quality of life and result in cleaner and greener
environment.
This paper gives an extension to state-of-the art by a systematic,
in-depth overview of technologies used for smart parking detection
realization focusing on performances of most popular sensors used
nowadays as well as power requirements analysis for supporting
the sensing infrastructure. Further, an analysis on the performance
of the photodiode, Light-dependent resistor (LDR), Infrared LED,
Ultrasonic, LiDAR and magnetic sensors were provided. From the
power consumption perspective photodiode should be the most
appropriate vehicle detection sensor, however it lacks detection
accuracy. Therefore, the most appropriate results in terms of both
consumption and accuracy would be 3-axis magnetic sensor, which
is followed by ultrasonic sensor. In addition, performances of Low
Power Wide Area radio communication technologies, such as LoRa,
NB-IoT and Sigfox were analyzed, both in terms of availability and
consumption, which are commonly found in today’s smart parking
detection systems. LoRaWAN was shown to be the best LPWA
technology since it is infrastructure independent, and power con-
sumption is by far smaller compared to other LPWA technologies
(Sigfox and NB-IoT).
To cope with issues resulting from potential high power con-
sumption of battery operated devices, two strategies for optimi-
zation were proposed. First solution uses a drop in signal strength
on the receiving side which can serve as an indicator of parking
space occupancy once the vehicle is located above the sensor de-
vice. More particularly, RSSI signals collected from the environment
using LoRaWAN, Sigfox and NB-IoT technology indicate that a drop
in signal strength can indeed serve as vehicle present at the parking
lot. A second solution proposed a novel device that compensates
expensive, mainly battery-operated and power hungry LPWA-
based smart parking sensors. In particular, a big picture on novel
architecture for harvesting the surrounding energy and using the
same for circuitry wake-up therefore saving the energy is proposed.
Declaration of competing interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing
financial interests or personal relationships that could have
appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.
CRediT authorship contribution statement
T. Perkovi
c: Data curation, Writing - original draft, Software,


Validation. P. Soli c: Writing - review & editing, Supervision, Visu-
alization, Investigation. H. Zargariasl: Software, Validation, Inves-

tigation. D. Coko: Visualization, Investigation. Joel J.P.C. Rodrigues:
Supervision.
Acknowledgment
This work was partially supported by the Croatian Science
Foundation under the project “Internet of Things: Research and
Applications”, UIP-2017-05-4206; by FCT/MCTES through national
funds and when applicable co-funded EU funds under the Project
UIDB/EEA/50008/2020; and by Brazilian National Council for
Research and Development (CNPq) via Grant No. 309335/2017-5.
References
Abdullah, S., Ismail, W., Halim, Z., Zulkifli, C., 2013. Integrating Zigbee-based mesh
network with embedded passive and active rfid for production management
automation. IEEE Intl Conf on RFID-Technol Appl 1e6.
Al-Turjman, F., 2018. Mobile couriers’ selection for the smart-grid in smart-cities’
pervasive sensing. Future Generat. Comput. Syst. 82, 327e341.
Al-Turjman, F., Malekloo, A., 2019. Smart parking in IoT-enabled cities: a survey.
Sustain Cities Soc. 49, 101608.
Almeida, P., Soares de Oliveira, L., Jr, A., Jr, E., Koerich, A., 2015. PKLot - a robust
dataset for parking lot classification. Expert Syst. Appl. 42 https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.eswa.2015.02.009.
Arab, M., Nadeem, T., 2017. MagnoPark - locating on-street parking spaces using
magnetometer-based pedestrians’ smartphones. In: 2017 14th Annual IEEE
International Conference on Sensing, Communication, and Networking
(SECON), pp. 1e9.
Bagula, A., Castelli, L., Zennaro, M., 2015. On the Design of Smart Parking Networks
in the Smart Cities: an Optimal Sensor Placement Model 15.
Bibri, S.E., 2018. The IoT for smart sustainable cities of the future: an analytical
framework for sensor-based big data applications for environmental sustain-
ability. Sustain Cities Soc. 38, 230e253.
Bong, D., Ting, K., Lai, K., 2011. Integrated approach in the design of car park oc-
cupancy information system (COINS). IAENG Int. J. Comput. Sci. 35.
Bulan, O., Loce, R.P., Wu, W., Wang, Y., Bernal, E.A., Fan, Z., 2013. Video-based real-
time on-street parking occupancy detection system. J. Electron. Imag. 22.
de Carvalho Silva, J., Rodrigues, J.J.P.C., Alberti, A.M., Solic, P., Aquino, A.L.L., 2017.
Lorawan d a low power wan protocol for internet of things: a review and
opportunities. In: 2017 2nd International Multidisciplinary Conference on
Computer and Energy Science. SpliTech, pp. 1e6.
Centenaro, M., Vangelista, L., Zanella, A., Zorzi, M., 2016. Long-range communica-
tions in unlicensed bands: the rising stars in the IoT and smart city scenarios.
IEEE Wireless Commun 23.
Coric, V., Gruteser, M., 2013. Crowdsensing maps of on-street parking spaces. IEEE
Intl Conf Distributed Comput Sens Syst 115e122.
Cruz, M.A.A., Rodrigues, J.J.P.C., Gomes, G., Almeida, P., Rabelo, R.A.L., Kumar, N.,
Mumtaz, S., 2019. An IoT-based solution for smart parking. In: Singh, P.K.,
Pawłowski, W., Tanwar, S., Rodrigues, J.J.P.C., Obaidat, M.S. (Eds.), International
Conference on Computing Communication and Cyber Security. Springer
Singapore. IC4S 2019.
De Donno, D., Catarinucci, L., Tarricone, L., 2013. A battery-assisted sensor-enhanced
RFID tag enabling heterogeneous wireless sensor networks. IEEE Sensor. J. 14,
1048e1055.
Geng, Y., Cassandras, C.G., 2013. New “smart parking” system based on resource
allocation and reservations. IEEE Trans. Intell. Transport. Syst. 14, 1129e1139.
Gharaibeh, A., Salahuddin, M.A., Hussini, S.J., Khreishah, A., Khalil, I., Guizani, M., Al-
Fuqaha, A., 2017. Smart cities: a survey on data management, security, and
enabling technologies. IEEE Commun Surv Tutorials 19, 2456e2501.
Jeffrey, J., Patil, R., Narahari, S., Didagi, Y., Bapat, J., Das, D., 2012. Smart parking
system using wireless sensor networks. Intl Conf Sens Technol Appl 306e311.
Kianpisheh, A., Mustaffa, N., Limtrairut, P., Keikhosrokiani, P., 2012. Smart parking
system (sps) architecture using ultrasonic detector. insert 55e58.
Kotb, A.O., Shen, Y., Zhu, X., Huang, Y., 2016. iparkerda new smart car-parking
system based on dynamic resource allocation and pricing. IEEE Trans. Intell.
Transport. Syst. 17, 2637e2647.
 T. Perkovi
c et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 262 (2020) 121181
Kotb, A.O., Shen, Y., Huang, Y., IEEE Intell Transport Syst Mag, 2017. Smart parking
guidance, monitoring and reservations: a review, 9, 6e16.
Larisis, N., Perlepes, L., Kikiras, P., Stamoulis, G., 2012. U-park: parking management
system based on wireless sensor network technology. Intl Conf Sens Technol
Appl 170e177.
Lee, S., Yoon, D., Ghosh, A., 2008. Intelligent parking lot application using wireless
sensor networks. In: McQuay, W.K., Smari, W.W. (Eds.), Intl Symp on Collabo-
rative Technologies and Systems. IEEE.
Lin, T., Rivano, H., Le Moue €l, F., 2017. A survey of smart parking solutions. IEEE Trans.
Intell. Transport. Syst. 18, 3229e3253. https://doi.org/10.1109/
TITS.2017.2685143.
Moguel, E., Preciado, M., Preciado, J., 2014. Smart parking campus: an example of
integrating different parking sensing solutions into a single scalable system. In:
Schoitsch, E., et al. (Eds.), ERCIM News Smart Cities. ERCIM.
Nguyen, T., Nguyen, C., 2014. An approach for building an intelligent parking sup-
port system. In: Giang, N.T., et al. (Eds.), Symp on Information and Communi-
cation Technology. Association for Computing Machinery.
Nizetic, S., Djilali, N., Papadopoulos, A., Rodrigues, J.J., 2019. Smart technologies for
promotion of energy efficiency, utilization of sustainable resources and waste
management. J. Clean. Prod. 231, 565e591.
Perkovi
c, T., Damjanovi


c, S., Soli c, P., Patrono, L., Rodrigues, J., 2019. Meeting chal-
lenges in IoT: sensing, energy efficiency and the implementation. In: Yang, X.,
Sherratt, S., Dey, N., Joshi, A. (Eds.), Fourth International Congress on Informa-
tion and Communication Technology. Springer. ICICT 2019.
Pham, T.N., Tsai, M., Nguyen, D.B., Dow, C., Deng, D., 2015. A cloud-based smart-
parking system based on internet-of-things technologies. IEEE Access 3,
13
1581e1591.
Raza, U., Kulkarni, P., Sooriyabandara, M., 2017. Low power wide area networks: an
overview. IEEE Commun Surv Tutorials 19, 855e873.
Sevillano, X., Marmol, E., Fernandez-Arguedas, V., 2014. Towards smart traffic
management systems: vacant on-street parking spot detection based on video
analytics. In: Corchado, Juan M., et al. (Eds.), Intl Conf on Information Fusion.
IEEE.


Soli c, P., Perkovi

c, T., Konsa, T., Zargariasl, H., Patrono, L., 2019. Smart parking sensor
performance evaluation. In: 2019 International Conference on Software. Tele-
communications and Computer Networks (SoftCOM), pp. 1e6.
Solic, P., Colella, R., Catarinucci, L., Perkovic, T., Patrono, L., 2019. Proof of presence:
novel vehicle detection system. IEEE Wireless Communications 26 (6), 44e49.
https://doi.org/10.1109/MWC.001.1900133.
Someswar, G.M., Dayananda, R.B., Anupama, S., Priyadarshini, J., Shariff, A.A., 2017.
Design & development of an autonomic integrated car parking system. Com-
pusoft 6 (3), 2309.
Song, B., Choi, H., Lee, H.S., 2008. Surveillance tracking system using passive
infrared motion sensors in wireless sensor network, 2008. In: International
Conference on Information Networking, pp. 1e5.
Wahyono, Jo, K., 2017. Cumulative dual foreground differences for illegally parked
vehicles detection. IEEE Trans Ind Inf 13, 2464e2473. https://doi.org/10.1109/
TII.2017.2665584.
Zanella, A., Bui, N., Castellani, A., Vangelista, L., Zorzi, M., 2014. Internet of things for
smart cities. IEEE Internet Things J 1, 22e32.
Zhao, W., 2012. Parking Management System with Rfid and Sensor Networks 198-
199.