论文标题

乘车市场的空间定价按充血费用

Spatial Pricing in Ride-Sourcing Markets under a Congestion Charge

论文作者

Li, Sen, Yang, Hai, Poolla, Kameshwar, Varaiya, Pravin

论文摘要

本文研究了乘车平台的最佳空间定价,但要收取拥塞费用。该平台确定了运输网络上的乘车价格以最大化其利润,而监管机构则征收拥塞费用以减少城市核心的交通拥堵。提出了一个网络经济平衡模型,以捕获客运需求,驾驶员供应,乘客和驾驶员等待时间,平台定价,车辆重新定位和运输网络上的流量平衡之间的紧密相互作用。总体最佳定价问题是将其作为非凸线程序。提出了一种算法来大致计算其最佳解决方案,并建立了紧密的上限以评估其相对于全球最佳解决方案的性能损失。使用拟议的模型,我们比较了三种形式的拥塞费用的影响:(a)对进入拥塞区域的乘车车辆的单向警戒线; (b)对进入或退出拥塞区域的乘车车辆的双向警戒线; (c)所有乘车旅行的基于旅行的拥塞费用。我们表明,单向交通拥堵的指控不仅减少了拥塞区的乘车交通,而且还降低了交通拥堵区域以外的旅行成本,并使这些服务不足的地区的乘客受益。我们进一步表明,与其他交通拥堵指控相比,一方向的警戒线费在缓解交通拥堵方面更有效:为了实现相同的拥塞缓解目标,它对乘客,驾驶员和平台的成本较小。另一方面,与其他费用相比,基于旅行的拥塞费用在收入累积方面更有效:为了提高相同的税收收入,这会导致乘客,驾驶员和平台造成较小的损失。

This paper studies the optimal spatial pricing for a ride-sourcing platform subject to a congestion charge. The platform determines the ride prices over the transportation network to maximize its profit, while the regulatory agency imposes the congestion charge to reduce traffic congestion in the urban core. A network economic equilibrium model is proposed to capture the intimate interactions among passenger demand, driver supply, passenger and driver waiting times, platform pricing, vehicle repositioning and flow balance over the transportation network. The overall optimal pricing problem is cast as a non-convex program. An algorithm is proposed to approximately compute its optimal solution, and a tight upper bound is established to evaluate its performance loss with respect to the globally optimal solution. Using the proposed model, we compare the impacts of three forms of congestion charge: (a) a one-directional cordon charge on ride-sourcing vehicles that enter the congestion area; (b) a bi-directional cordon charge on ride-sourcing vehicles that enter or exit the congestion area; (c) a trip-based congestion charge on all ride-sourcing trips. We show that the one-directional congestion charge not only reduces the ride-sourcing traffic in the congestion area, but also reduces the travel cost outside the congestion zone and benefits passengers in these underserved areas. We further show that compared to other congestion charges, the one-directional cordon charge is more effective in congestion mitigation: to achieve the same congestion-mitigation target, it imposes a smaller cost on passengers, drivers, and the platform. On the other hand, compared with the other charges, the trip-based congestion charge is more effective in revenue-raising: to raise the same tax revenue, it leads to a smaller loss to passengers, drivers, and the platform.

扫码加入交流群

加入微信交流群

微信交流群二维码

扫码加入学术交流群,获取更多资源