Advertisement

The Schedule-Based Approach in Dynamic Transit Modelling: A General Overview

  • A. Nuzzolo
  • U. Crisalli
Part of the Operations Research/Computer Science Interfaces Series book series (ORCS, volume 28)

Abstract

Recently, beside the traditional frequency-based approach in dynamic modelling of transit networks, a new approach, called schedule-based, has been developed. This approach refers to services in terms of runs, using the arrival/departure times at stops of each vehicle, and allows us to take into account the time evolution of both supply and demand, as well as to obtain the load of each vehicle at each stop. This modelling approach requires a more precise specification of user behaviour mechanism and a specific treatment for origin/destination matrices, supply models, path choice and assignment models. In this paper the state-of-the-art of each of these points, with a classification of existing models and the future perspectives of the research in this field, is provided.

Keywords

Assignment Model Transit Network Transit Service Stochastic User Equilibrium Path Choice 
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.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [1]
    Abdel-Aty, M. (2001) Using ordered probit modelling to study the effect of ATIS on transit ridership, Transportation Research, 9C, 265–277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. [2]
    Anez, J., de la Barra, T. and Perez, B. (1996) Dual graph representation of transport networks. Transportation Research, 30B, 209–216.Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    Ben-Akiva, M., and Lerman, S. (1985) Discrete choice analysis, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    Ben-Akiva, M., De Palma, A. and Kaysi, I. (1991) Dynamic network models and driver information systems. Transportation Research 25A, 5, 251–266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. [5]
    Bowman, L. and Turnquist, M. (1981) Service frequency, schedule reliability and passenger wait times at transit stops, Transportation Research, 15A, 465–471.Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    Carraresi, P., Maluccelli, F., and Pallottino, S. (1996) Regional Mass Transit Assignment with resource constraints. Transportation Research, 30B, 81–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. [7]
    Cascetta, E. (2001) Transportation systems engineering: theory and methods. Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    Cascetta, E., Biggiero, L., Nuzzolo, A., and Russo, F. (1996) A System of Within-Day Dynamic Demand and Assignment Models for Scheduled Intercity Services. Proceedings of 24th European Transportation Forum Seminar D-E, London, England.Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    Cominetti, A., and Correa, U. (2001) Common-Lines and passenger assignment in congested transit networks. Transportation Science, 35, 250–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. [10]
    Chriqui, C. and Robillard, P. (1975), Common Bus Lines. Transportation Science, 9, 110–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. [11]
    Crisalli, U. (1998) A stochastic Network Loading model for ITS urban transit networks, in Urban Transport and the Environment for the 21st century IV, C. Borrego and L. Sucharov (Eds.), Computational Mechanics Publications, 481–490.Google Scholar
  12. [12]
    Crisalli, U. (1999a) User’s behaviour simulation of intercity rail service choices. Simulation Practice & Theory, 17, 233–249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. [13]
    Crisalli, U. (1999b) Dynamic transit assignment algorithms for urban congested networks, in Urban Transport and the Environment for the 21st century V, L.J. Sucharov (ed), Computational Mechanics Publications, 373–382.Google Scholar
  14. [14]
    Crisalli, U., and Coppola, P. (2001) Applications of schedule-based path choice and assignment models for transit networks. Proceedings of 6th Conference of the Hong Kong Society for Transportation Studies, Hong Kong, 110–119.Google Scholar
  15. [15]
    de Cea, J., and Fernandez, E. (1993) Transit Assignment for Congested Public Transport System: An Equilibrium Model. Transportation Science, 27, 133–147.Google Scholar
  16. [16]
    Domencich, T. and McFadden, D. (1975) Urban Travel Demand. North Holland, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
  17. [17]
    Florian, M. (1998) Deterministic time table transit assignment. Preprints of PTRC seminar on National models, Stockholm.Google Scholar
  18. [18]
    Hickman, M.D., and Wilson, N.H.M. (1995) Passenger travel time and path choice implications of real-time transit information. Transportation Research, 4, 211–226.Google Scholar
  19. [19]
    Hickman, M.D., and Bernstein, D.H. (1997) Transit service and path choice models in stochastic and time-dependent networks. Transportation Science, 31, 129–146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. [20]
    Lam, W.H.K., Gao, Z.Y., Chan, K.S., and Yang, H. (1999) A Stochastic User Equilibrium Model for Congested Transit Networks. Transportation Research, 33B, 351–368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. [21]
    McFadden, D. (2001) Disaggregate behavioural travel demand’s RUM side — a 30 years retrospective, in Travel behaviour research. The leading edge, D. Hensher ( Ed. ), Pergamon, 17–63.Google Scholar
  22. [22]
    Moller-Pedersen, J. (1999) Assignment model for timetable based systems (TPSCHEDULE). Proceedings of 27th European Transportation Forum, Seminar F, 159–168, Cambridge, England.Google Scholar
  23. [23]
    Nguyen, S., and Pallottino, S. (1988) Equilibration Traffic Assignment for Large Scale Transit Networks. European Journal of Operational Research, 37, 176–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. [24]
    Nguyen, S., Pallottino, S. and Malucelli, F. (2001) A modeling framework for the passenger assignment on a transport network with time-tables. Transportation Science, 35, 238–249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. [25]
    Nielsen, O.A. (2000) A stochastic transit assignment model considering differences in passengers utility functions, Transportation Research, 34B, 377–402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. [26]
    Nielsen, O.A. (2002) A stochastic transit assignment model considering differences in passengers utility functions, Workshop proceedings of Croucher Advanced Study Institute (ASI) Course on “Advanced modelling for transit operations and service planning”, Session F, paper F1, Hong Kong.Google Scholar
  27. [27]
    Nielsen, O.A., and Jovicic, G. (1999) A large scale stochastic timetable-based transit assignment model for route and sub-mode choices. Proceedings of 27th European Transportation Forum, Seminar F, 169–184, Cambridge, England.Google Scholar
  28. [28]
    Nielsen, O.A., Hansen, C.O. and Daly, A. (2001) A large-scale model system for the Copenhagen-Ringsted railway project, in Travel behaviour research. The leading edge, D. Hensher ( Ed. ), Pergamon, 603–626.Google Scholar
  29. [29]
    Nuzzolo, A., and Crisalli, U. (2001), Estimation of transit origin/destination matrices from traffic counts using a schedule-based approach, Proceedings of European Transportation Forum 2001, Cambridge, UK.Google Scholar
  30. [30]
    Nuzzolo, A. and Russo, F. (1994a), An Equilibrium Assignment Model for Intercity Transit Networks, Proceedings of TRISTAN II Conference, Capri, Italy, 1994.Google Scholar
  31. [31]
    Nuzzolo, A., and Russo, F. (1994b) Departure time and path choice models for intercity transit assignment. Proceedings of 7th IATBR Conference, Valle Nevado, Cile.Google Scholar
  32. [32]
    Nuzzolo, A. and Russo, F. (1996) Stochastic assignment models for transit low frequency services: some theoretical and operative aspects, in Advanced methods in transportation analysis, Bianco, L. and Toth, P. (Eds.), Springer&Verlang, New York, 321–339.Google Scholar
  33. [33]
    Nuzzolo, A., and Russo, F. (1998) A Dynamic Network Loading model for transit services, Proceedings of TRISTAN I II Conference, San Juan, Puerto Rico.Google Scholar
  34. [34]
    Nuzzolo, A., Russo, F., and Crisalli, U. (1999) A doubly dynamic assignment model for congested urban transit networks. Proceedings of 27th European Transportation Forum, Seminar F, 169–184, Cambridge, England.Google Scholar
  35. [35]
    Nuzzolo, A., Crisalli, U., and Gangemi, F. (2000) A behavioural choice model for the evaluation of railway supply and pricing policies. Transportation Research, 35A, 211226.Google Scholar
  36. [36]
    Nuzzolo, A., Russo, F., and Crisalli, U. (200la) Doubly dynamic path choice models for urban transit systems, in Travel behaviour research. The leading edge, D. Hensher ( Ed. ), Pergamon, 797–812.Google Scholar
  37. [37]
    Nuzzolo, A., Russo, F., and Crisalli, U. (2001b) A doubly dynamic schedule-based assignment model for transit networks. Transportation Science, 35, 268–285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. [38]
    Nuzzolo, A., Russo, F., and Crisalli, U. (2002) Transit network modelling. The schedule-based dynamic approach, Collana Trasporti, Franco Angeli ( Ed. ), Milan, Italy.Google Scholar
  39. [39]
    Russo, F. (1998), A model for schedule optimization in an intercity transportation system. In Computer in Railways VI, Mellitt et al. (Eds), WIT Press, Boston-Southampton.Google Scholar
  40. [40]
    Spiess, H., and Florian, M. (1989) Optimal strategies: a new assignment model for transit networks. Transportation Research, 23B, 83–102.Google Scholar
  41. [41]
    Tong, C.O., and Richardson, A.J. (1984) Estimation of time-dependent origin-destination matrices for transit networks. Journal of Advanced Transportation, 18, 145–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. [42]
    Wong, S.C. and Tong, C.O. (1998), Estimation of time-dependent origin-destination matrices for transit networks, Transportation Research, 32B, 35–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. [43]
    Wong, S.C., and Tong, C.O. (1999) A stochastic transit assignment model using a dynamic schedule-based network. Transportation Research, 33B, 107–121.Google Scholar
  44. [44]
    Wong, S.C., and Tong, C.O. (2001) Planning an urban rail transit system using a schedule-based network model. Proceedings of 9th WCTR Conference, Seoul, Korea.Google Scholar
  45. [45]
    Wu, J.H., Florian, M. and Marcotte, P. (1994) Transit Equilibrium Assignment: A Model and Solution Algorithms. Transportation Science, 28, 193–203.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • A. Nuzzolo
    • 1
  • U. Crisalli
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Civil Engineering“Tor Vergata”University of RomeRomeItaly

Personalised recommendations