• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Evening Standard: TfL may use AI to catch fare dodgers

Fawkes Cat

Established Member
Joined
8 May 2017
Messages
3,015
I don't think that this has been posted: if it has then (1) apologies and (2) please lock/merge/delete as appropriate:

From https://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/tfl-ai-fare-dodgers-london-underground-artificial-intelligence-b1124563.html#:~:text=Artificial intelligence is to be,station, on the Jubilee line.

London Underground: Artificial Intelligence software is being used to detect fare dodgers​

AI identified passengers likely to jump barriers at Willesden Green station
Artificial intelligence is to be trialled on the London Underground in a bid to stem soaring rates of fare dodging, it can be revealed.
Computer technology that can identify passengers likely to jump ticket barriers has been tested at Willesden Green station, on the Jubilee line.
Transport for London now plans to expand the trial after successfully linking the AI software with its network of station cameras.
Siwan Hayward, TfL’s director of security, policing and enforcement, insisted the technology was not being used as a “facial recognition tool”.

She said: “The pilot project was able to detect fare evasion attempts through the gate-line and enrich our data and insight on fare evasion levels and methods.
“Following a review by our safety, health and environment team, we will be progressing this to an in-station trial to monitor its effectiveness.”

Latest figures estimate that TfL loses more than £130m a year in income due to fare dodging. About 3.9 per cent of journeys are unpaid – about one in 25.
More than 31,000 penalty fares have been issued since April and more than 11,000 cases are being considered for prosecution.
TfL wants to increase the penalty fare for failing to pay the correct fare to be increased from £80 to £100 but says this has yet to be approved by Mayor Sadiq Khan, despite being first proposed a year ago.
TfL declined to comment on the AI trial. But it is understood that the project at Willesden Green used AI algorithms and motion detection to “detect the act of fare evasion” – passengers passing through barriers without paying.
TfL has known for some time that the “wide aisle” gates – which allow access to wheelchair users, people with children in prams and pushchairs and passengers with luggage – are often targeted by fare dodgers.
The gates can be easily pushed open and also close slowly – meaning a fare evader can “tailgate” behind a paying passenger.
TfL will use the information from the AI pilot to design more secure “wide aisle” gates, and to improve its existing “irregular travel analysis platform”, which gathers data on fare dodgers.
Figures presented to TfL’s customer service panel meeting tomorrow show there has been a 26 per cent increase in penalty fares being served on fare dodgers between April and September, compared with the same period last year.
A total of 213 people – thought to be hard-core offenders - have been stopped and interviewed. Each had evaded an average of 89 journeys – worth £821 in unpaid fares.
However TfL has a shortage of almost 200 enforcement officers. Only 452 of the 551 posts are filled – and of those at work, 81 have been seconded onto other duties, leaving only 371 available to catch fare-dodgers.
TfL has also had to contend with controversies over some "heavy handed" enforcement operations, including when a young mother was apprehended in Croydon.
This resulted in a Met police officer being placed under under criminal investigation after the woman was found to have been wrongly arrested.
Fare dodgers are known to present a wider problem – they are responsible for more than half of the verbal and physical attacks on Tube station staff.
Attacks have soared by 50 per cent, with 647 incidents reported in the last six months.
The Jubilee line is the second worst on the Underground, after the Northern line, for crime.
The Standard revealed last week that Tube crime was up 56 per cent year on year, fuelled by an 83 per cent increase in thefts and a 107 per cent increase in robberies.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Joined
21 May 2014
Messages
734
Using AI to do image recognition / pattern detection for enforcement purposes is very, very dodgy territory and has been controversial already when used by police forces to tackle football hooliganism.

Let's hope they're being very cautious that the model doesn't do a bit of racial profiling when "identifying passengers likely to jump ticket barriers" ...
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
98,069
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
The wide gates have in my view been somewhat of a failure - they are easy to push open and tailgate through, but they also mean it is no longer obvious where the staff are going to be if you do need assistance.

As TfL only typically have one per gateline, haven't these proven rather a waste of money?
 

ChewChewTrain

Member
Joined
27 Jun 2019
Messages
350
Using AI to do image recognition / pattern detection for enforcement purposes is very, very dodgy territory and has been controversial already when used by police forces to tackle football hooliganism.

Let's hope they're being very cautious that the model doesn't do a bit of racial profiling when "identifying passengers likely to jump ticket barriers" ...
If (if) particular patterns exist among those who tend to jump the barriers, I don’t see how there can be any other result.

If we’re going to say that’s unacceptable then the whole thing seems like a waste of money.
 

jon81uk

Member
Joined
17 Aug 2022
Messages
632
Location
Harlow, Essex
The wide gates have in my view been somewhat of a failure - they are easy to push open and tailgate through, but they also mean it is no longer obvious where the staff are going to be if you do need assistance.

As TfL only typically have one per gateline, haven't these proven rather a waste of money?

Most central London stations now seem to have one wide gate in each direction.

But yes the tailgating does seem to be an issue, I watched someone yesterday clearly hanging back so they could tailgate (directly in front of the TfL staff) to leave the Underground at Tottenham Hale and then enter the Greater Anglia gateline they did the same thing, waited for the person at the wide gate to go through and then tailgated them, with the GA staff right in front of them.
There is often revenue protecton and BTP watching the Underground gateline though as it must be a regular occurrence. Whereas GA seem to only target morning peak exit ticket checks.
 

JonathanH

Veteran Member
Joined
29 May 2011
Messages
18,934
The wide gates have in my view been somewhat of a failure - they are easy to push open and tailgate through, but they also mean it is no longer obvious where the staff are going to be if you do need assistance.
Quite, people forcing the gates and tailgating is a problem on the narrow gates, let alone the wide ones, which are totally unfit for purpose. Having said that manual gates weren't a panacea either.
 

Brissle Girl

Established Member
Joined
17 Jul 2018
Messages
2,718
I saw lots of tailgating by schoolchildren at Barking recently whilst revenue staff just looked on. Managed to stop one by coming to a halt immediately after I went through the gate to their annoyance, but I'm sure it would have been only a matter of seconds before they tried again. Why are the revenue staff so disinterested?
 

The exile

Established Member
Joined
31 Mar 2010
Messages
2,762
Location
Somerset
I saw lots of tailgating by schoolchildren at Barking recently whilst revenue staff just looked on. Managed to stop one by coming to a halt immediately after I went through the gate to their annoyance, but I'm sure it would have been only a matter of seconds before they tried again. Why are the revenue staff so disinterested?
Fear of the consequences, I would imagine.
 

AndroidBango

Member
Joined
17 Sep 2022
Messages
87
Location
London
Using AI to do image recognition / pattern detection for enforcement purposes is very, very dodgy territory and has been controversial already when used by police forces to tackle football hooliganism.

Let's hope they're being very cautious that the model doesn't do a bit of racial profiling when "identifying passengers likely to jump ticket barriers" ...
Perhaps this is more likely to be used in monitoring journey patterns across the network?
 

FOH

Member
Joined
17 Oct 2013
Messages
712
I saw lots of tailgating by schoolchildren at Barking recently whilst revenue staff just looked on. Managed to stop one by coming to a halt immediately after I went through the gate to their annoyance, but I'm sure it would have been only a matter of seconds before they tried again. Why are the revenue staff so disinterested?
Best way I've done it is go slow, slow and leg it. 100% success rate that the gate closes on the tailgater
 

deltic

Established Member
Joined
8 Feb 2010
Messages
3,237
I saw lots of tailgating by schoolchildren at Barking recently whilst revenue staff just looked on. Managed to stop one by coming to a halt immediately after I went through the gate to their annoyance, but I'm sure it would have been only a matter of seconds before they tried again. Why are the revenue staff so disinterested?
If they are travelling in Greater London isnt travel free anyway for them?

Using AI to do image recognition / pattern detection for enforcement purposes is very, very dodgy territory and has been controversial already when used by police forces to tackle football hooliganism.

Let's hope they're being very cautious that the model doesn't do a bit of racial profiling when "identifying passengers likely to jump ticket barriers" ...
It can also be very effective
 
Joined
21 May 2014
Messages
734
It can also be very effective

Indeed, but so can giving the bad guys a good old fashioned kicking, and we as a society have decided that's not acceptable...

The jury is out on the use of AI in this way, but whilst that's the case, I think any organisation seeking to use it should do so with a huge amount of caution.
 

spag23

On Moderation
Joined
4 Nov 2012
Messages
793
It doesn't take AI to spot the "anorak plus hood up" brigade lurking around and loping about near the gates, waiting for a fare-payer.
 

Neo9320

Member
Joined
17 Feb 2019
Messages
234
Location
Somerset
It doesn't take AI to spot the "anorak plus hood up" brigade lurking around and loping about near the gates, waiting for a fare-payer.
If AI was being used to detect anoraks it would be a very overworked system on the rail network…jokes aside I get your point.
 

dosxuk

Established Member
Joined
2 Jan 2011
Messages
1,777
The jury is out on the use of AI in this way
The jury is out on some very specific uses of facial recognition tools.

While I doubt there is much actual AI going on here (you can't do a press release at the moment without mentioning how you're using AI), simple object detection could be used to perform this sort of task, a common enough thing that it's widely present in consumer devices and used for similar tasks the world over.

This trial could be as simple as using the CCTV to count how many person-shaped-objects pass the barrier for each opening cycle, and alerting RPI's to investigate when triggered - indeed they only talk about detecting the act, rather than predicting the act for the trial.
 

Adam Williams

Established Member
Joined
2 Jan 2018
Messages
1,784
Location
Warks
While I doubt there is much actual AI going on here (you can't do a press release at the moment without mentioning how you're using AI)
Concur with this.

simple object detection could be used to perform this sort of task, a common enough thing that it's widely present in consumer devices and used for similar tasks the world over.
We had a phrase for that sort of thing and we called the field "Computer Vision" before the hype train begun!

The trial at Willesden Green used AI algorithms and motion detection to “detect the act of fare evasion” – passengers passing through barriers without paying
I thought the minister recently overseeing technology as secretary of state for DCMS had asked Microsoft to eradicate algorithms, anyway?
 

Sad Sprinter

Established Member
Joined
5 Jun 2017
Messages
1,834
Location
Way on down South London town
Looking forward to every black person being denied entry at the ticket gates in a few years!

(Note: being of an ethnic minority myself this is very much sarcasm)

Regarding the part of the young mother being apprehended - it doesn't surprise me. Revenue Protection is succumbing to that trend of British thought, like the spectre of the so called "benefit scroungers", that someone effectively "cheating" the system of society and getting something for free or more than they're entitled too, is a disproportionately severe offence. As such, I feel that revenue protectors are beginning to treat "fare-dodgers", whether deliberate, accidental or where they've done so out of a so called sob-story - as dangerous criminal outlaws. Hence why I always ensure I don't draw attention to myself when walking past a bunch of RP by ticket barriers. And I always have a valid ticket.
 

jon81uk

Member
Joined
17 Aug 2022
Messages
632
Location
Harlow, Essex
Regarding the part of the young mother being apprehended - it doesn't surprise me. Revenue Protection is succumbing to that trend of British thought, like the spectre of the so called "benefit scroungers", that someone effectively "cheating" the system of society and getting something for free or more than they're entitled too, is a disproportionately severe offence. As such, I feel that revenue protectors are beginning to treat "fare-dodgers", whether deliberate, accidental or where they've done so out of a so called sob-story - as dangerous criminal outlaws. Hence why I always ensure I don't draw attention to myself when walking past a bunch of RP by ticket barriers. And I always have a valid ticket.

There is a difference in that "benefit scroungers" often are actually people genuinely claiming the correct benefits being vilified by the media. Whereas a lot of the type of fare-dodgers being discussed here, ie the people who push through or tailgate at barriers generally are doing deliberate criminal acts.

The other issue of course is that the government expects TfL to be self-sustaining and that fare income should cover all costs, including roads and other aspects. Therefore TfL have to show they are taking fare evasion seriously because they need the money and the government are pushing them to get more fare revenue.
 

Mawkie

Member
Joined
17 Feb 2016
Messages
428
There is an excellent write up on the AI trial at Willesden Junction Green below, based upon a recent FOI request I think.

He describes the benefits of AI, not just for revenue protection, but for aggressive behaviour, long passenger dwell times on platforms (potential suicidal risk), overstepping the yellow line on the platform edges, and much more. One in particular I noted was the arrival of a wheelchair user on a non-step-free platform and the ability of AI to notify a staff member via their iPad.

Naturally there are the usual questions around big brother and the such, however I think fewer people seem to have the concerns I have around that these days.

 
Last edited:

AdamWW

Established Member
Joined
6 Nov 2012
Messages
3,703
He describes the benefits of AI, not just for revenue protection, but for aggressive behaviour, long passenger dwell times on platforms (potential suicidal risk),

But also potentially an enthusiast.
 

185143

Established Member
Joined
3 Mar 2013
Messages
4,550
I saw lots of tailgating by schoolchildren at Barking recently whilst revenue staff just looked on. Managed to stop one by coming to a halt immediately after I went through the gate to their annoyance, but I'm sure it would have been only a matter of seconds before they tried again. Why are the revenue staff so disinterested?
One word.

Knives.
 

Trainbike46

Established Member
Joined
18 Sep 2021
Messages
2,336
Location
belfast
If (if) particular patterns exist among those who tend to jump the barriers, I don’t see how there can be any other result.

If we’re going to say that’s unacceptable then the whole thing seems like a waste of money.
There's a lot of ways in which AI can come to the wrong conclusion, a common one being that the results depend a lot on the quality of the data going in.

A key issue that can also exist is that, if applied in certain ways, it can worsen any biases that may exist; for example, if the data feeding the model is based on enforcement action, and the model is used to inform future enforcement action, it can exacerbate any biases in the original dataset.

And that's why it is very important to:
I think any organisation seeking to use it should do so with a huge amount of caution.

But also potentially an enthusiast.
I mean, the response to a suicide risk would presumably to go check the person is okay, and whether they need help. If you then found an enthusiast filming a train you'd know it was a false alarm pretty quickly
 

Mawkie

Member
Joined
17 Feb 2016
Messages
428
It's not at Willesden Junction; it's at Willesden Green.
Thank you, I'll correct my post.

By the way, if anyone is interested, here is the official 98 page redacted PDF from the FOI request. I haven't read it yet, so can't summarise it I'm afraid.


(I would usually just upload the pdf, but apparently it's too big for the forum server)
 
Last edited:
Joined
31 Dec 2019
Messages
643
Location
uk
Or you could directly link to the TfL website.





I, for what my opinion is worth, think this is an excellent bit of kit if it saves even just 1 life through the identification of vulnerable people and trespassers, not to mention the quality of life improvement for customers by identifying things such as wheelchairs and high amounts of luggage. The supposed persecution of train spotters is an obtuse argument given the intentions of the software.
 

AdamWW

Established Member
Joined
6 Nov 2012
Messages
3,703
Best ignore them then rather than risk upsetting a train spotter.

I mean, the response to a suicide risk would presumably to go check the person is okay, and whether they need help. If you then found an enthusiast filming a train you'd know it was a false alarm pretty quickly

I'd say that it depends on what the false positive rate is. Too high you end up sending staff around dealing with "potential" problems and missing the real ones.

I've only read the newspaper article so maybe the reports explain this, but has machine learning moved on so much recently that you can teach the system to spot weapons by sending a single person around and have it just pick up on the weapons and not the person wielding them?
 

jon81uk

Member
Joined
17 Aug 2022
Messages
632
Location
Harlow, Essex
I saw lots of tailgating by schoolchildren at Barking recently whilst revenue staff just looked on. Managed to stop one by coming to a halt immediately after I went through the gate to their annoyance, but I'm sure it would have been only a matter of seconds before they tried again. Why are the revenue staff so disinterested?

One word.

Knives.
Also there is a big difference between revenue staff and customer service staff. Almost always the people you see in uniform at TfL gatelines are just customer service staff, most revenue staff on TfL are plain clothes. I've had someone approach me when a barrier closed on me (I thought I had tapped) and they were plain clothes but got a badge out to show me. Those people are there to approach fare dodgers, or keep getting intel on them and do a big sting on them, the customer service staff are not there to put themselves in harms way, for the above-mentioned reason.
 

Top