WEBVTT - What's the Best Strategy for Finding a Parking Spot?

0:00:01.920 --> 0:00:06.600
<v Speaker 1>Welcome to brain Stuff production of I Heart Radio. Hey

0:00:06.640 --> 0:00:11.120
<v Speaker 1>brain Stuff, Lauren Voge obamb here. Imagine it's Saturday afternoon,

0:00:11.240 --> 0:00:14.320
<v Speaker 1>and due to a number of questionable choices that you made,

0:00:14.360 --> 0:00:16.919
<v Speaker 1>either in this or a past life, you have a

0:00:16.960 --> 0:00:20.759
<v Speaker 1>few necessary errands to run at the mall. So it

0:00:20.840 --> 0:00:23.600
<v Speaker 1>seems does everyone else. The mall parking lot is crowded.

0:00:24.160 --> 0:00:26.560
<v Speaker 1>So where should you park your car if you're trying

0:00:26.600 --> 0:00:28.920
<v Speaker 1>to save time at the first spot you see, no

0:00:28.960 --> 0:00:31.200
<v Speaker 1>matter how far away from the entrance, or should you

0:00:31.240 --> 0:00:35.280
<v Speaker 1>prowl for an elusive spot closer in there's a scientific

0:00:35.320 --> 0:00:38.519
<v Speaker 1>study for that. It was published in September nineteen and

0:00:38.560 --> 0:00:42.120
<v Speaker 1>the Journal of Statistical Mechanics and in it, Physics Professor's

0:00:42.200 --> 0:00:45.560
<v Speaker 1>Sydney Rendner from the Santa Fe Institute and Paul Kravitzky

0:00:45.680 --> 0:00:49.640
<v Speaker 1>of Boston University applied their mathematical prowess to pinpoint the

0:00:49.680 --> 0:00:53.520
<v Speaker 1>best parking spots search strategies. Here we define the best

0:00:53.560 --> 0:00:56.080
<v Speaker 1>spot as the one nearest to the mall entrance. Some

0:00:56.080 --> 0:00:58.080
<v Speaker 1>people might favor a spot on a top floor of

0:00:58.120 --> 0:01:00.240
<v Speaker 1>a parking garage, for example, to prevent their harv of

0:01:00.280 --> 0:01:04.679
<v Speaker 1>getting dinged, but that's another story. Rednar and Whisky divided

0:01:04.720 --> 0:01:11.240
<v Speaker 1>parking personas into three categories, meek, optimistic, and prudent as

0:01:11.240 --> 0:01:14.280
<v Speaker 1>they define them. Meek drivers immediately settle for the first

0:01:14.280 --> 0:01:17.440
<v Speaker 1>spot they find, which may leave spots near the front unfilled,

0:01:17.680 --> 0:01:22.000
<v Speaker 1>a plus incur a long walk. Optimistic drivers aren't afraid

0:01:22.040 --> 0:01:25.760
<v Speaker 1>to hunt, certain that eventually they'll triumphantly land their primo spot,

0:01:25.800 --> 0:01:27.440
<v Speaker 1>no matter how many times they have to circle the

0:01:27.520 --> 0:01:31.080
<v Speaker 1>lot to find it. Prudent parkers, meanwhile, are a bit

0:01:31.080 --> 0:01:34.200
<v Speaker 1>more aggressive than meek drivers by passing the low hanging

0:01:34.240 --> 0:01:36.880
<v Speaker 1>fruit in hopes of a closer spot, but are unwilling

0:01:36.920 --> 0:01:39.399
<v Speaker 1>to circle several times to get just a bit closer

0:01:39.480 --> 0:01:42.280
<v Speaker 1>to their destination. They may end up backtracking to a

0:01:42.319 --> 0:01:44.800
<v Speaker 1>spot that a meek driver would have claimed initially if

0:01:44.840 --> 0:01:49.720
<v Speaker 1>they don't find something better immediately after identifying their categories,

0:01:49.840 --> 0:01:53.760
<v Speaker 1>the scientists created a simulation using processes such as probability

0:01:53.800 --> 0:01:57.280
<v Speaker 1>theory and rate equations. The researchers found that the prudent

0:01:57.360 --> 0:02:00.280
<v Speaker 1>strategy was the best and that it cost drivers least

0:02:00.280 --> 0:02:03.800
<v Speaker 1>amount of time, followed by the optimistic strategy and then

0:02:04.040 --> 0:02:07.840
<v Speaker 1>the meek strategy. Redner is quick to point out that

0:02:07.840 --> 0:02:11.800
<v Speaker 1>this particular exercise is purely mathematical, he said via email.

0:02:12.160 --> 0:02:14.200
<v Speaker 1>We try and hard to minimize the number of free

0:02:14.200 --> 0:02:17.919
<v Speaker 1>parameters by judicious choices, such as assigning the same speed

0:02:17.960 --> 0:02:21.640
<v Speaker 1>for walking and driving, and of course they couldn't account

0:02:21.639 --> 0:02:25.480
<v Speaker 1>for every variable. Quote. The main complication was the inherent

0:02:25.600 --> 0:02:29.079
<v Speaker 1>many body nature of the parking process, and namely, one

0:02:29.120 --> 0:02:31.799
<v Speaker 1>doesn't know in advance which spots are free, and the

0:02:31.840 --> 0:02:34.160
<v Speaker 1>game is whether to pick the current spot or try

0:02:34.200 --> 0:02:37.280
<v Speaker 1>another spot which may not be open closer to the destination.

0:02:38.280 --> 0:02:42.079
<v Speaker 1>They also omitted real world variables like drivers speed, intense

0:02:42.120 --> 0:02:47.680
<v Speaker 1>competition for spots, or the irrationality of harried human beings. Okay,

0:02:47.800 --> 0:02:50.640
<v Speaker 1>so that's the mathematical side of the story. But is

0:02:50.680 --> 0:02:53.120
<v Speaker 1>there a parking lot strategy that better accounts for the

0:02:53.200 --> 0:02:57.160
<v Speaker 1>quirks of real people. We also spoke via email with

0:02:57.240 --> 0:03:00.960
<v Speaker 1>Andrew Velki, an associate professor of psychology at Christopher Newport

0:03:01.040 --> 0:03:05.000
<v Speaker 1>University in Virginia. He said, it is important to note

0:03:05.040 --> 0:03:08.040
<v Speaker 1>this simple fact. The success of my parking strategy is

0:03:08.080 --> 0:03:11.960
<v Speaker 1>in part dependent upon which parking strategy the other drivers select.

0:03:12.560 --> 0:03:15.400
<v Speaker 1>It's an excellent application of game theory e g. The

0:03:15.480 --> 0:03:19.200
<v Speaker 1>prisoner's dilemma. My best strategy is only better if enough

0:03:19.200 --> 0:03:22.480
<v Speaker 1>other drivers select one of the alternative strategies. If everyone

0:03:22.520 --> 0:03:24.520
<v Speaker 1>tried to play the same parking strategy, it would no

0:03:24.600 --> 0:03:29.560
<v Speaker 1>longer be optimal. Velki also notes ideal parking spaces like

0:03:29.680 --> 0:03:32.919
<v Speaker 1>right in front of your final destination, are usually unavailable.

0:03:33.440 --> 0:03:37.280
<v Speaker 1>Quote time and perceived scarcity are the two biggest factors

0:03:37.280 --> 0:03:40.440
<v Speaker 1>that affect parking strategies. People will spend time looking for

0:03:40.480 --> 0:03:43.320
<v Speaker 1>a parking space and incur a time travel cost from

0:03:43.320 --> 0:03:46.320
<v Speaker 1>their vehicle to the final destination after they've parked their car.

0:03:47.080 --> 0:03:49.400
<v Speaker 1>It appears that people are often attempting to reduce the

0:03:49.400 --> 0:03:52.640
<v Speaker 1>time travel cost and often incur a greater acquisition time

0:03:52.680 --> 0:03:55.840
<v Speaker 1>cost as a result. It's most interesting to note that

0:03:55.880 --> 0:03:58.040
<v Speaker 1>people will try to get a parking spot that's closest

0:03:58.040 --> 0:03:59.760
<v Speaker 1>to the door of the gym or exercise club that

0:03:59.760 --> 0:04:04.160
<v Speaker 1>there are about to enter. To answer our parking lot question,

0:04:04.640 --> 0:04:08.960
<v Speaker 1>Vilki referred to paper published in the journal Transportation Science

0:04:09.280 --> 0:04:12.280
<v Speaker 1>in which the researchers determined that the best strategy was

0:04:12.320 --> 0:04:14.840
<v Speaker 1>to randomly pick a row and park in the closest

0:04:14.880 --> 0:04:17.920
<v Speaker 1>apparent space in that row, or rather than to drive

0:04:18.000 --> 0:04:20.520
<v Speaker 1>up and down multiple rows searching for a closer spot.

0:04:22.000 --> 0:04:24.279
<v Speaker 1>In other words, the time saved in finding a spot

0:04:24.400 --> 0:04:26.560
<v Speaker 1>made up for the longer time spent walking to the

0:04:26.600 --> 0:04:30.360
<v Speaker 1>front door. It wasn't a huge time savings though. In

0:04:30.360 --> 0:04:32.840
<v Speaker 1>that model, the expected time to the front door from

0:04:32.880 --> 0:04:35.279
<v Speaker 1>the spot using the pick a row method was sixty

0:04:35.360 --> 0:04:38.440
<v Speaker 1>one point three one seconds. With the multiple row method

0:04:38.520 --> 0:04:43.039
<v Speaker 1>it was seventy point seven seconds. Velki says those few

0:04:43.080 --> 0:04:45.440
<v Speaker 1>times when we do score spot at the front become

0:04:45.560 --> 0:04:49.880
<v Speaker 1>very memorable to us, but quote perhaps even more memorable

0:04:49.920 --> 0:04:51.800
<v Speaker 1>are the times when we park our cars and come

0:04:51.800 --> 0:04:53.680
<v Speaker 1>across a space right in front on our way to

0:04:53.720 --> 0:04:56.719
<v Speaker 1>the entrance of the destination. We will employ a counter

0:04:56.760 --> 0:04:59.360
<v Speaker 1>factual if I had only driven around more process when

0:04:59.400 --> 0:05:03.080
<v Speaker 1>we noticed the spaces we missed. As a result, people

0:05:03.080 --> 0:05:06.520
<v Speaker 1>will overpredict both the likely availability of these spaces and

0:05:06.680 --> 0:05:11.240
<v Speaker 1>their own likelihood of obtaining these spaces. Parking strategies are

0:05:11.240 --> 0:05:14.839
<v Speaker 1>one thing, but parking lot design also dramatically affects efficiency

0:05:14.920 --> 0:05:19.080
<v Speaker 1>and space consumption. A British mathematics professor insists that lots

0:05:19.080 --> 0:05:23.080
<v Speaker 1>with diagonal spaces dramatically reduce congestion and improve traffic flow

0:05:23.160 --> 0:05:31.280
<v Speaker 1>compared to those that use grid patterns. Today's episode was

0:05:31.279 --> 0:05:34.120
<v Speaker 1>written by Nathan Chandler and produced by Tyler Clang. Brain

0:05:34.160 --> 0:05:36.400
<v Speaker 1>Stuff is a production of I Heart Radio's How Stuff Works.

0:05:36.560 --> 0:05:38.960
<v Speaker 1>Promoin this and lots of other topics, visit our home planet,

0:05:38.960 --> 0:05:41.480
<v Speaker 1>how stuff Works dot com, and for more podcasts from

0:05:41.480 --> 0:05:44.479
<v Speaker 1>my heart Radio, visit i heart Radio app, Apple Podcasts,

0:05:44.520 --> 0:05:46.200
<v Speaker 1>or wherever you listen to your favorite shows.