Public Transport

, Volume 2, Issue 4, pp 269–289 | Cite as

Transit vehicles’ headway distribution and service irregularity

  • Giuseppe Bellei
  • Konstantinos Gkoumas
Original Paper


Pairing, or bunching, of vehicles on a public transportation line influences the adaptive choice at stops due to the random headways and waiting times it determines. In order to ensure consistency with the characteristics of service perturbations, as represented by a transit operation model, it is important to identify the headway distributions representing service perturbations. A stochastic simulation model is developed for a one-way transit line, which accounts for several service characteristics (dwell time at stops, capacity constraint and arrivals during the dwell time). Samples of headways at the main stops are utilized to build histograms of the headway’s frequencies by their length, which allow to identify the functional forms and parameters of the headway distributions. For these stops, density plots of consecutive headways are also produced. Sensitivity analysis is carried out to identify the effect of key parameters (dispatching headway, maximum load and running time).


Operation models Vehicle pairing Transit service performance Transit assignment 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Arnold BC, Castillo E, Sarabia JM, Gonzalez-Vega L (2000) Multiple modes in densities with normal conditionals. Stat Probab Lett 49(4):355–363 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bellei G, Gkoumas K (2009) Integrated public transit priority strategies. In: Proceedings of CASPT XI Google Scholar
  3. Bertini RL, El-Geneidy AM (2004) Modeling transit trip time using archived bus dispatch system data. J Transp Eng ASCE 130(1):56–67 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bouzaïene-Ayari B, Gendreau M, Nguyen S (2001) Modeling bus stops in transit networks: A survey and new formulations. Transp Sci 35(3):304–321 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Chapman RA, Michel JF (1978) Modelling the tendency of buses to form pairs. Transp Sci 12(2):165–175 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Daganzo CF (2009) A headway-based approach to eliminate bus bunching: Systematic analysis and comparisons. Transp Res B 43(10):913–921 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Desaulniers G, Hickman MD (2007) Public transit. In: Barnhart C, Laporte G (eds) Handbooks in operations research & management science: Transportation, vol 14. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 69–127 Google Scholar
  8. Gentile G, Nguyen S, Pallottino S (2005) Route choice on transit networks with online information at stops. Transp Sci 39(3):289–297 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Hickman MD (2001) An analytic stochastic model for the transit vehicle holding problem. Transp Sci 35(3):215–237 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Larson R, Odoni A (1981) Urban operations research. Prentice Hall, New York Google Scholar
  11. Matsumoto M, Nishimura T (1998) Mersenne twister: A 623-dimensionally equidistributed uniform pseudorandom number generator. Trans Modell Comput Simul 8(1):3–30 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Nagatani T (2001a) Bunching transition in a time-headway model of a bus route. Phys Rev E 63(3):36115 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Nagatani T (2001b) Interaction between buses and passengers on a bus route. Physica A 296(1):320–330 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Nagatani T (2002) Bunching and delay in bus-route system with a couple of recurrent buses. Physica A 305(3):629–639 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Newell GF, Potts RB (1964) Maintaining a bus schedule. Proc 2nd Aust Road Res Board Conf 2(1):388–393 Google Scholar
  16. Nguyen S, Pallottino S, Gendreau M (1998) Implicit enumeration of hyperpaths in logit models for transit networks. Transp Sci 32(1):54–64 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Sarabia JM, Castillo E, Pasqual M, Sarabia M (2007) Bivariate income distributions with lognormal conditionals. J Econ Inequal 5(3):371–383 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Spiess H, Florian M (1989) Optimal strategies: A new assignment model for transit networks. Transp Res B 23(2):83–102 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Strathman JG, Kimpel TJ, Dueker KJ, Gerhart R, Turner K, Griffin D, Callas S (2001) Bus transit operations control: Review and an experiment involving Tri-Met’s automated bus dispatch system. J Public Transp 4(1):1–26 Google Scholar
  20. Sun A, Hickman M (2008) The holding problem at multiple holding stations. In: Hickman M, Mirchandani P, Voss S (eds) Computer-aided systems in public transport. Springer, Berlin, pp 339–362 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Turnquist MA, Blume SW (1980) Evaluating potential effectiveness of headway control strategies for transit systems. Transp Res Rec 746:25–29 Google Scholar
  22. Vuchic VR (1969) Propagation of schedule disturbances in line-haul passenger transportation. Rev UITP 18(4):281–285 Google Scholar
  23. Welding PI (1957) The instability of close interval service. Oper Res Q 8(3):133–148 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Wilson NHM, Macchi RA, Fellows RE, Deckoff AA (1992) Improving service on the MBTA green line through better operations control. Transp Res Rec 1361:296–304 Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Dipartimento di Idraulica Trasporti e StradeSapienza—Università di RomaRomeItaly

Personalised recommendations