Advertisement

Schedule-Based Dynamic Assignment Models for Public Transport Networks

  • F. Russo
Part of the Operations Research/Computer Science Interfaces Series book series (ORCS, volume 28)

Abstract

In the sphere of transit assignment, the dynamic models approach is the focus of increasing interest, because of the importance of explicit system simulations to know user flow for each run and the performance of different service networks in terms of times and comfort levels, and to enable user decisions to be evaluated if ITS is used. Urban transit systems are characterised not only by day-to-day dynamics but also within-day dynamics. Thus the evaluation process has to be represented by means of the two relative processes (within-day and day-to-day). This paper reports some extension and review on the framework of the approach proposed by Nuzzolo and Russo (1998) and generalized in Nuzzolo et al. (2001, 2002), with the study of the different aspects of path choice — on the demand side — and of operating services — on the supply side — in relation to the different assignment models that can be useful.

Keywords

Operating Service Assignment Model Transit Network Path Choice Transit Assignment 
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]
    Abkowitz M.D. (1981) “An analysis of the commuter departure time decision”. Transportation, 283–297.Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    Ben Akiva M., Lerman S.R. (1987) “Discrete choice analysis”, MIT Press, Cambridge Mass.Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    Cantarella G.E. and Cascetta E. (1995) Dynamic Processes and Equilibrium in Transportation Networks: Towards a Unifying Theory. Transportation Science 29, 305–329CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. [4]
    Chriqui C. and Robillard P. (1975) Common bus lines. Transportation Science 9, 115–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. [5]
    Crisalli U. (2001) Modelli di assegnazione doppiamente dinamica alle reti di trasporto collettivo urbano: applicazioni ed analisi sperimentali. In “Metodi e Tecnologie dell’Ingegneria dei Trasporti: Seminario 1999” G. E. Cantarella and F. Russo (eds.). Franco Angeli, Milano.Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    Crisalli U. and Rosati L. (2001) DYNATRANSIT: A doubly dynamic transit assignment software. In Preprint of 4th International EUROSIM Congress, Delft, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    Daganzo C. (1979) “Multinomial Probit”. Academic Press, New York, USA.Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    Daly A. (1999) The use of schedule-based assignments in public transport modelling. Proceedings of 27th European Transportation Forum, Seminar F, Cambridge, England, 149–157.Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    Dial R. B. (1967) Transit pathfinder algorithm. Highway Research Record 205 67–85.Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    Florian M. (2002) Operational aspects of a scheduled-based approach in transit modelling: a particular implementation and future modelling challenges. Preprints of the First Workshop on The Schedule-Based Approach in Dynamic Transit Modelling (SBDTM2002). Ischia, 19–34.Google Scholar
  11. [11]
    Lam W.H.K. and Bell M.G.H (2003) (eds) Advanced Modeling for Transit Operations and Service Planning Pergamon.Google Scholar
  12. [12]
    Lam W.H.K. and Wu Z.X. (2002) Estimation of transit passenger origin-destination matrices from passenger counts in congested transit networks. Preprints of the First Workshop on The Schedule-Based Approach in Dynamic Transit Modelling (SBDTM2002). Ischia. 89–94.Google Scholar
  13. [13]
    Nguyen S. and Pallottino S. (1988) Equilibration Traffic Assignment for Large Scale Transit Networks. European Journal of Operational Research 37, 176–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. [14]
    Nielsen O.A. (1999) The use of schedule-based assignments in public transport modelling. Proceedings of 27th European Transportation Forum, Seminar F, pp. 149157. Cambridge. England.Google Scholar
  15. [15]
    Nielsen O.A. (2002) A multi-class timetable-based transit assignment model with error components in the utility functions. Preprints of the First Workshop on The Schedule-Based Approach in Dynamic Transit Modelling (SBDTM2002). Ischia, 5562.Google Scholar
  16. [16]
    Nuzzolo A. (2003) Transit Path Choice and Assignment Model Approaches. In “Advanced Modeling for Transit Operations and Service Planning” edited by William H.K Lam and Michael G.H. Bell. Pergamon, 93–124.Google Scholar
  17. [17]
    Nuzzolo A., Russo F. and Crisalli U. (2001) A doubly dynamic schedule-based assignment model for transit networks. Transportation Science, Vol. 35, n° 3.Google Scholar
  18. [18]
    Nuzzolo A., Russo F. and Crisalli U. (2002) “Transit Network Modelling: The schedule-based dynamic approach”, Franco Angeli, Milano.Google Scholar
  19. [19]
    Nuzzolo A., Russo F. (1996) Stochastic assignment models for transit low frequency services. Some theoretical and operative aspects. L. Bianco, P. Toth, eds. Advanced Methods in Transportation Analysis. Springer Verlag, Berlin, 321–340.Google Scholar
  20. [20]
    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
  21. [21]
    Postorino M.N., Musolino G. and Velonà P. (2002) Updating o/d trip matrices for schedale-based public transport systems: an application to a real case. Preprints of the First Workshop on The Schedule-Based Approach in Dynamic Transit Modelling (SBDTM2002). Ischia, 95–101.Google Scholar
  22. [22]
    Russo F. (2001) “Modelli di scelta del percorso sequenziali per l’assegnazione dinamica a reti di servizi di trasporto collettivo urbano”. In “Metodi e Tecnologie dell’Ingegneria dei Trasporti: Seminario 1999” G. E. Cantarella and F. Russo (eds.). Franco Angeli, Milano.Google Scholar
  23. [23]
    Russo F. and Velonà P. (2002a) “Approccio day-to-day per la modellizzazione del percorso in un sistema di trasporto collettivo: valutazioni analitiche e simulative nel caso di choice set con due alternative”. In “Metodi e Tecnologie dell’Ingegneria dei Trasporti: Seminario 2001” G. E. Cantarella and F. Russo (eds). Franco Angeli, Milano.Google Scholar
  24. [24]
    Russo F. and Velonà P. (2002b) “Day-to-day approach for path choice models on transit system: analytical evaluations and simulation results”. Proceedings of 30th European Transportation Forum. Cambridge. England.Google Scholar
  25. [25]
    Spiess H., Florian M. (1989) Optimal strategies: A new assignment model for transit networks. Transportation Res. 23B.Google Scholar
  26. [26]
    Wong S. C. and Tong C. O. (2003) The Estimation of Origin-Destination Matrices in Transit Networks. In “Advanced Modeling for Transit Operations and Service Planning” edited by William H.K Lam and Michael G.H. Bell. Pergamon, 287–314.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • F. Russo
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computer Science, Mathematics, Electronic and Transportation“Mediterranea ”University of Reggio CalabriaReggio CalabriaItaly

Personalised recommendations