Dynamic Vulnerability Analysis of Public Transport Networks: Mitigation Effects of Real-Time Information
In this paper, a dynamic and stochastic notion of public transport network vulnerability is developed. While previous studies have considered only the network topology, the granular nature of services requires a more refined model for supply and demand interactions in order to evaluate the impacts of disruptions. We extend the measures of betweenness centrality (often used to identify potentially important links) and link importance to a dynamic-stochastic setting from the perspectives of both operators and passengers. We also formalize the value of real-time information (RTI) provision for reducing disruption impacts. The developed measures are applied in a case study for the high-frequency public transport network of Stockholm, Sweden. The importance ranking of the links varies depending on the RTI provision scheme. The results suggest that betweenness centrality (passenger/vehicle flows) may not be a good indicator of link importance. The results of the case study reveal that while service disruptions have negative effects and RTI may have significant positive influence, counter examples also exist due to secondary spillover effects.
KeywordsVulnerability Public transport Disruption Transit assignment Network centrality Critical links Real-time information Mitigation
The authors would like to thank Lars-Göran Mattsson, participants at the 5th International Symposium on Transportation Network Reliability (INSTR), 18–19 December 2012, Hong Kong, and two anonymous reviewers for their valuable suggestions and comments on the paper.
- Berche B, von Ferber C, Holovatch T, Holovatch Y (2009) Resilience of public transport networks against attacks. Eur Phys J B 71:125–137Google Scholar
- Carson Y, Maria A (1997) Simulation optimization: methods and applications. Proceedings of the 1997 Winter Simulation Conference, 118–126Google Scholar
- Colak S, Lus H, Atligan AR (2010) Vulnerability of networks against critical links failure. Available at: http://arxiv.org/abs/1012.5961v2
- Crucitti P, Latora V, Porta S (2007) Centrality measures in spatial networks of urban streets. Phys Rev E 73:1–5Google Scholar
- Dowling R, Skabardonis A, Alexiadis V (2004) Traffic analysis toolbox volume III: guidelines for applying traffic microsimulation modeling software. U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration (FHA), Washington DCGoogle Scholar
- Jenelius E, Mattsson L-G (2012) Road network vulnerability analysis of area-covering disruptions: a grid-based approach with case study. Transp Res A 46:746–760Google Scholar
- Jenelius E, Mattsson L-G (2014). Road network vulnerability analysis: Conceptualization, implementation and application. Comput Environ Urban Syst, accepted for publication.Google Scholar
- Jenelius E, Petersen T, Mattsson L-G (2006) Importance and exposure in road network vulnerability analysis. Transp Res A 40:537–560Google Scholar
- Nicholson AJ, Du ZP (1994) Improving network reliability: a framework. In: Proceedings of 17th Australian Road Research Board Conference, 3:1–17Google Scholar
- SL – AB StorStockholms Lokaltrafik (2009) Annual report 2009. Available at: http://sl.se/Global/Pdf/Rapporter/SLfakta_2009_webb.pdf [in Swedish]
- Sohn J (2006) Evaluating the significance of highway network links under the flood damage: an accessibility approach. Transp Res A 40:491–506Google Scholar
- Taylor MAP, Susilawati (2012) Remoteness and accessibility in the vulnerability analysis of regional road networks. Transp Res A 46:761–771Google Scholar