论文标题
公共交通系统中的评估和路线的统一方法
A Unified Approach to Evaluation and Routing in Public Transport Systems
论文作者
论文摘要
评估公共交通系统的服务质量以及了解乘客在模式或路线之间如何选择的服务质量对于公共交通运营商,竞争流动服务和政策制定者的提供者至关重要。但是,文献尚未就应如何执行这些任务中的任何一个提供共识,这可能导致不一致或违反直觉结果。本文提供了有关如何始终如一地评估公共交通系统(路线集,时间表和线条计划)的基本要素的正式待遇,以及旅行者如何在路线上分发。我们的主要见解是,评估和路由是同一硬币的两个方面:通过求解适当的优化模型,一个人可以获得路线集,时间表或线条计划(最佳目标值)的质量(最佳目标值),也可以获得旅行者在路线上的分布(最佳解决方案本身)。新框架的实际相关性已通过几种用荷兰和瑞士铁路网络的真实数据验证的应用证明。本文开发的措施和路线选择模型使计划人员能够创建更好的线条计划,并有效地分析时间表的效率低下。该框架还揭示了:(i)将正确模型用于正确计划阶段的重要性,(ii)公共运输计划者准确地对旅行行为进行建模并不总是必要的,尤其是对于高级计划,以及(iii)以不一致的方式将模型相结合可以避免使用新框架产生重大的负面后果。
Both evaluating the service quality of a public transport system and understanding how passengers choose between modes or routes is imperative for public transport operators, providers of competing mobility services and policy makers. However, the literature does not offer consensus on how either of these tasks should be performed, which can lead to inconsistent or counter-intuitive results. This paper provides a formal treatment on how fundamental elements of public transport systems (route sets, timetables and line plans) can be evaluated consistently, and how travelers distribute over routes. Our main insight is that evaluation and routing are two sides of the same coin: by solving an appropriate optimization model one obtains both the quality of the route set, timetable or line plan (the optimal objective value), and the distribution of the travelers over the routes (the optimal solution itself). The practical relevance of the new framework is demonstrated with several applications that are validated with real data from the Dutch and Swiss railway networks. The measures and route choice models developed in this paper enable planners to create better line plans and to effectively analyze timetables for inefficiencies. The framework also reveals: (i) the importance of using the right model for the right stage of planning, (ii) that it is not always necessary for public transport planners to accurately model travel behavior, especially for high-level planning, and (iii) that combining models in an inconsistent way can have significant negative consequences that are avoided with the new framework.