Networks and Spatial Economics

, Volume 15, Issue 3, pp 419–441 | Cite as

Submission to the DTA2012 Special Issue: Convergence of Time Discretization Schemes for Continuous-Time Dynamic Network Loading Models

  • Rui Ma
  • Xuegang (Jeff) Ban
  • Jong-Shi Pang
  • Henry X. Liu
Article

Abstract

Dynamic Network Loading (DNL) is an essential component of Dynamic Traffic Assignment (DTA) and Dynamic User Equilibrium (DUE). Most DNL models are formulated in continuous time but solved in discrete time to obtain numerical solutions. This paper discusses the importance of choosing proper discretization schemes to numerically solve continuous-time DNL models and further to obtain convergence and other desirable properties of the discretization schemes. We use the recently developed α point-queue model as an example. We first develop theoretical results to prove the consistency, stability and convergence of the implicit and explicit discretization schemes for solving the α point-queue model. We then conduct numerical experiments to show such results accordingly. We also discuss the implications of the implicit and explicit discretization schemes to the developments of DNL and DTA/DUE solution algorithms.

Keywords

Discretization scheme Dynamic traffic assignment Dynamic network loading Point-queue model Ordinary differential equation Convergence analysis 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank the anonymous referees for their helpful suggestions on an earlier version of the paper. The work of Rui Ma and Xuegang (Jeff) Ban is based on research supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant EFRI 1024647. The work of Jong-Shi Pang is based on research supported by the National Science Foundation under Grants EFRI 1024984 and CMMI 0969600. The work of Henry X. Liu is based on research supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant EFRI 1024604. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this paper are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.

References

  1. Ban X, Liu H, Ferris M, Ran B (2008) A link-node complementarity model and solution algorithm for dynamic user equilibria with exact flow propagations. Transp Res Part B 42(9):823–842CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ban X, Pang JS, Liu H, Ma R (2012a) Continuous-time point-queue models in dynamic network loading. Transp Res Part B 46(3):360–380CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Ban X, Pang JS, Liu H, Ma R (2012b) Modeling and solving continuous-time instantaneous dynamic user equilibria: A differential complementarity systems approach. Transp Res Part B 46(3):389–408CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Carey M (2001) Dynamic traffic assignment with more flexible modelling with links. Netw Spat Econ 1(3–4):349–375MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Carey M, Balijepalli C, Watling D (2013) Extending the cell transmission model to multiple lanes and lane-changing. Netw Spat Econ. doi:10.1007/s11067-013-9193-7
  6. Carey M, Ge Y (2003) Comparing whole-link travel time models. Transp Res Part B 37(10):905–926CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Carey M, Ge Y (2007) Retaining desirable properties in discretising a travel-time model. Transp Res Part B 41(5):540–553CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  8. Carey M, Ge Y (2012) Comparison of methods for path flow reassignment for dynamic user equilibrium. Netw Spat Econ 12(3):337–376MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Carey M, McCartney M (2002) Behavior of a whole-link travel time model used in dynamic traffic assignment. Transp Res Part B 36(1):83–95CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Carey M, Subrahmanian E (2000) An approach to modelling time-varying flows on congested networks. Transp Res Part B 34(3):157–183CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Daganzo C (1994) The cell transportation model: a dynamic representation of highway traffic consistent with the hydrodynamic theory. Transp Res Part B 28(4):269–287CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Friesz TL, Kim T, Kwon C, Rigdon M (2010) Approximate network loading and dual-time-scale dynamic user equilibrium. Transp Res Part B 45(1):176–207CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Han K, Friesz TL, Yao T (2013a) A partial differential equation formulation of vickrey’s bottleneck model, part I: methodology and theoretical analysis. Transp Res Part B 49:55–74CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Han K, Friesz TL, Yao T (2013b) A partial differential equation formulation of vickrey’s bottleneck model, part II: numerical analysis and computation. Transp Res Part B 49:75–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Han S (2003) Dynamic traffic modeling and dynamic stochastic user equilibrium assignment for general road networks. Transp Res Part B 37(3):225–249CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Heydecker B, Verlander N (1999) Calculation of dynamic traffic equilibrium assignments. In: Proceedings of the European transport conferences, Seminar F., pp 79–91Google Scholar
  17. Hoffman JD (1992) Numerical methods for engineers and scientists. McGraw-Hill, New YorkMATHGoogle Scholar
  18. Kuwahara M, Akamatsu T (1997) Decomposition of the reactive dynamic assignments with queues for a many-to-many origin-destination pattern. Transp Res Part B 31(1):1–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Li J, Fujiwara O, Kawakami S (2000) A reactive dynamic user equilibrium model in networks with queues. Transp Res Part B 34(8):605–624CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Lighthill M, Whitham J (1955) On kinematic waves. I: flow movement in long rivers; ii: a theory of traffic flow on long crowded roads. Proc Royal Soc A 229:281–345MathSciNetCrossRefADSMATHGoogle Scholar
  21. Nie X, Zhang H (2005a) A comparative study of some macroscopic link models used in dynamic traffic assignment. Netw Spat Econ 5(1):89–115CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  22. Nie X, Zhang H (2005b) Delay-function-based link models: their properties and computational issues. Transp Res Part B 39(8):729–751CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Pang JS, Stewart D (2008) Differential variational inequalities. Math Prog 113(2):345–424MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  24. Peeta S, Ziliaskopoulos A (2001) Foundations of dynamic traffic assignment: the past, the present and the future. Netw Spat Econ 1(3–4):233–265CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Ran B, Boyce D (1996) Modeling dynamic transportation networks: an intelligent transportation systems oriented approach. Springer-Verlag, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Richards P (1956) Shockwaves on the highway. Oper Res 4(1):42–51MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Shampine L, Gladwell I, Thompson S (2003) Solving ODEs with MATLAB. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Shampine L, Thompson S (2001) Solving ddes in MATLAB. Appl Numer Math 37(4):441–458MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  29. Strikwerda J (1989) Finite difference schemes and partial differential equations. Chapman & Hall, LondonMATHGoogle Scholar
  30. Wie B, Tobin R, Carey M (2002) The existence, uniqueness and computation of an arc-based dynamic network user equilibrium formulation. Transp Res Part B 36(10):897–918CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Xu Y, Wu J, Florian M, Marcotte P, Zhu D (1999) Advances in the continuous dynamic network loading problem. Transp Sci 33(4):341–353CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  32. Zhang H (2001) Continuum flow models, traffic flow theory, a state-of-the-art report. Technical report, Transportation Research Board, original text by Reinhart Kuhne and Panos MichalopoulosGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Rui Ma
    • 1
  • Xuegang (Jeff) Ban
    • 2
  • Jong-Shi Pang
    • 3
  • Henry X. Liu
    • 4
  1. 1.Department of Civil and Environmental EngineeringUniversity of CaliforniaDavisUSA
  2. 2.Department of Civil and Environmental EngineeringRensselaer Polytechnic Institute (RPI)TroyUSA
  3. 3.Department of Industrial and Systems EngineeringUniversity of Southern CaliforniaLos AngelesUSA
  4. 4.Department of Civil EngineeringUniversity of MinnesotaMinneapolisUSA

Personalised recommendations