A Common Modeling Framework for Dynamic Traffic Assignment and Supply Chain Management Systems with Congestion Phenomena

  • Georgios Kalafatas
  • Srinivas Peeta


This paper seeks to illustrate the ability of the graph theoretic cell transmission model (GT-CTM), previously developed by the authors, to address some dynamic supply chain management (SCM) problems with congestion phenomena using a simple graphical representation. It further shows the conceptual equivalence between SCM and dynamic traffic assignment (DTA) problems using the GT-CTM framework. Thereby, the GT-CTM provides a generalized modeling framework to address dynamic network problems with congestion phenomena


Link Travel Time Dynamic Traffic Assignment Minimum Cost Flow Cell Connector Minimum Cost Flow Problem 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.



We would like to acknowledge Professor Reha Uzsoy of North Carolina State University and an anonymous referee for their useful comments.


  1. Ahuja, R.K., Magnanti, T.L. and Orlin, J.B. (1993). Network Flows: Theory Algorithms and Applications, Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  2. Aronson, J.E. (1989). A survey of dynamic network flows. Annals of Operations Research, 20, 1-66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Asmundsson, J., Rardin, R.L. and Uzsoy R. (2002). Tractable Nonlinear Capacity Models for Aggregate Production Planning. research report, Laboratory for Extended Enterprises at Purdue, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47907-1287.Google Scholar
  4. Daganzo, C.F. (1994). The cell transmission model: a simple dynamic representation of highway traffic consistent with the hydrodynamic theory. Transportation Research Part B,28(4), 269-287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Daganzo, C.F. (1995). The cell transmission model, Part II: network traffic. Transportation Research Part B,29(2), 79-93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Highway Capacity Manual, Dec 2000.Google Scholar
  7. Kalafatas, G. and Peeta, S. (2007). An exact graph structure for dynamic traffic assignment: formulation, properties and computational experience. Proceedings of the 86th Transportation Research Board Annual Meeting.Google Scholar
  8. Kalafatas, G. and Peeta, S. (2008a). A direct bridge between dynamic traffic assignment and graph theory. Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Applications of Advanced Technologies in Transportation (AATT 2008),May 2008, Athens, Greece.Google Scholar
  9. Kalafatas, G. and Peeta, S. (2008b). A graph-based formulation for the multiple destinations dynamic traffic assignment problem. Proceedings of the 2 nd International Symposium on Dynamic Traffic Assignment (DTA2008). June 2008, Katholieke Universiteit of Leuven, Belgium.Google Scholar
  10. Karmarkar, U.S. (1989). Capacity loading and release planning with work-in-progress (WIP) and lead-times. Journal of Manufacturing and Operations Management, 2, 105-123.Google Scholar
  11. Li, Y., Ziliaskopoulos, A.K. and Waller, S.T. (1999). Linear programming formulations for system optimum dynamic traffic assignment with arrival time–based and departure time–based demands. Transportation Research Record, 1667, 52-59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Zawack, D.J and Thompson, G.L. (1987). A dynamic space-time network flow model for city traffic congestion. Transportation Science, 21(3), 153-162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Ziliaskopoulos, A.K. (2000). A linear programming model for the single destination system ptimum dynamic traffic assignment problem. Transportation Science, 34(1), 37-49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag US 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Georgios Kalafatas
    • 1
  • Srinivas Peeta
    • 1
  1. 1.Purdue UniversityCaliforniaU.S.A

Personalised recommendations