Comparison of dynamic control strategies for transit operations
► Two different headway-based transit control approaches are formulated and compared. ► Both approaches are tested over an identical set of operational scenarios. ► Both control strategies improve the level of service and its variability. ► The deterministic control is preferred when bus capacity is...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Transportation research. Part C, Emerging technologies Emerging technologies, 2013-03, Vol.28, p.101-113 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 113 |
---|---|
container_issue | |
container_start_page | 101 |
container_title | Transportation research. Part C, Emerging technologies |
container_volume | 28 |
creator | Muñoz, Juan Carlos Cortés, Cristián E. Giesen, Ricardo Sáez, Doris Delgado, Felipe Valencia, Francisco Cipriano, Aldo |
description | ► Two different headway-based transit control approaches are formulated and compared. ► Both approaches are tested over an identical set of operational scenarios. ► Both control strategies improve the level of service and its variability. ► The deterministic control is preferred when bus capacity is frequently reached. ► The hybrid predictive approach performs better when capacity is not an issue.
Real-time headway-based control is a key issue to reduce bus bunching in high frequency urban bus services where schedules are difficult to implement. Several mechanisms have been proposed in the literature, but very few performance comparisons are available. In this paper two different approaches are tested over eight different scenarios. Both methodologies solve the same problem, the former based on a deterministic optimization over a long-term rolling horizon, while the latter proposes a hybrid predictive approach considering a shorter horizon and a stochastic evolution of the system. The comparison is conducted through scenarios that include three different dimensions: (i) bus capacities which can be reached or not, (ii) service frequencies, considering high and medium frequency services and (iii) different load profiles along the corridor. The results show that the deterministic approach performs better under scenarios where bus capacity could be reached frequently along the route while the hybrid predictive control approach performs better in situations where this does not happen. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1016/j.trc.2012.12.010 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1323252305</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0968090X1200160X</els_id><sourcerecordid>1323252305</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c454t-7de2734e28f16778aadef13826db1186c914c51fde63afc480147ab5e22502cb3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9UE1LxDAUDKLg-vEDvPUieGnNS5qmxYPI4hcseFHwFrLpi2RpmzXJCvvvzbKLR2Hg8R4z85gh5ApoBRSa21WVgqkYBVZlUKBHZAat7ErGRXdMZrRr2pJ29POUnMW4opRCJ-SM3M_9uNbBRT8V3hb9dtKjM4XxUwp-KGIKOuGXw1hYH4q8TdGlwq8x352f4gU5sXqIeHmY5-Tj6fF9_lIu3p5f5w-L0tSiTqXskUleI2stNFK2Wvdogbes6ZcAbWM6qI0A22PDtTV1S6GWeimQMUGZWfJzcrP3XQf_vcGY1OiiwWHQE_pNVMAZZ4JxKjIV9lQTfIwBrVoHN-qwVUDVriy1UrkstStLZeSysub6YK-j0YPNOY2Lf0ImQXScQebd7XmYs_44DCoah5PB3gU0SfXe_fPlF6JJfy8</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1323252305</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Comparison of dynamic control strategies for transit operations</title><source>Access via ScienceDirect (Elsevier)</source><creator>Muñoz, Juan Carlos ; Cortés, Cristián E. ; Giesen, Ricardo ; Sáez, Doris ; Delgado, Felipe ; Valencia, Francisco ; Cipriano, Aldo</creator><creatorcontrib>Muñoz, Juan Carlos ; Cortés, Cristián E. ; Giesen, Ricardo ; Sáez, Doris ; Delgado, Felipe ; Valencia, Francisco ; Cipriano, Aldo</creatorcontrib><description>► Two different headway-based transit control approaches are formulated and compared. ► Both approaches are tested over an identical set of operational scenarios. ► Both control strategies improve the level of service and its variability. ► The deterministic control is preferred when bus capacity is frequently reached. ► The hybrid predictive approach performs better when capacity is not an issue.
Real-time headway-based control is a key issue to reduce bus bunching in high frequency urban bus services where schedules are difficult to implement. Several mechanisms have been proposed in the literature, but very few performance comparisons are available. In this paper two different approaches are tested over eight different scenarios. Both methodologies solve the same problem, the former based on a deterministic optimization over a long-term rolling horizon, while the latter proposes a hybrid predictive approach considering a shorter horizon and a stochastic evolution of the system. The comparison is conducted through scenarios that include three different dimensions: (i) bus capacities which can be reached or not, (ii) service frequencies, considering high and medium frequency services and (iii) different load profiles along the corridor. The results show that the deterministic approach performs better under scenarios where bus capacity could be reached frequently along the route while the hybrid predictive control approach performs better in situations where this does not happen.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0968-090X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1879-2359</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.trc.2012.12.010</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Kidlington: Elsevier India Pvt Ltd</publisher><subject>Applied sciences ; Exact sciences and technology ; Ground, air and sea transportation, marine construction ; Performance comparison ; Road transportation and traffic ; Transit control ; Transit systems ; Transportation planning, management and economics ; Vehicle bunching</subject><ispartof>Transportation research. Part C, Emerging technologies, 2013-03, Vol.28, p.101-113</ispartof><rights>2012 Elsevier Ltd</rights><rights>2014 INIST-CNRS</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c454t-7de2734e28f16778aadef13826db1186c914c51fde63afc480147ab5e22502cb3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c454t-7de2734e28f16778aadef13826db1186c914c51fde63afc480147ab5e22502cb3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.trc.2012.12.010$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,3550,27924,27925,45995</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=27159321$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Muñoz, Juan Carlos</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cortés, Cristián E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Giesen, Ricardo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sáez, Doris</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Delgado, Felipe</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Valencia, Francisco</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cipriano, Aldo</creatorcontrib><title>Comparison of dynamic control strategies for transit operations</title><title>Transportation research. Part C, Emerging technologies</title><description>► Two different headway-based transit control approaches are formulated and compared. ► Both approaches are tested over an identical set of operational scenarios. ► Both control strategies improve the level of service and its variability. ► The deterministic control is preferred when bus capacity is frequently reached. ► The hybrid predictive approach performs better when capacity is not an issue.
Real-time headway-based control is a key issue to reduce bus bunching in high frequency urban bus services where schedules are difficult to implement. Several mechanisms have been proposed in the literature, but very few performance comparisons are available. In this paper two different approaches are tested over eight different scenarios. Both methodologies solve the same problem, the former based on a deterministic optimization over a long-term rolling horizon, while the latter proposes a hybrid predictive approach considering a shorter horizon and a stochastic evolution of the system. The comparison is conducted through scenarios that include three different dimensions: (i) bus capacities which can be reached or not, (ii) service frequencies, considering high and medium frequency services and (iii) different load profiles along the corridor. The results show that the deterministic approach performs better under scenarios where bus capacity could be reached frequently along the route while the hybrid predictive control approach performs better in situations where this does not happen.</description><subject>Applied sciences</subject><subject>Exact sciences and technology</subject><subject>Ground, air and sea transportation, marine construction</subject><subject>Performance comparison</subject><subject>Road transportation and traffic</subject><subject>Transit control</subject><subject>Transit systems</subject><subject>Transportation planning, management and economics</subject><subject>Vehicle bunching</subject><issn>0968-090X</issn><issn>1879-2359</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2013</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp9UE1LxDAUDKLg-vEDvPUieGnNS5qmxYPI4hcseFHwFrLpi2RpmzXJCvvvzbKLR2Hg8R4z85gh5ApoBRSa21WVgqkYBVZlUKBHZAat7ErGRXdMZrRr2pJ29POUnMW4opRCJ-SM3M_9uNbBRT8V3hb9dtKjM4XxUwp-KGIKOuGXw1hYH4q8TdGlwq8x352f4gU5sXqIeHmY5-Tj6fF9_lIu3p5f5w-L0tSiTqXskUleI2stNFK2Wvdogbes6ZcAbWM6qI0A22PDtTV1S6GWeimQMUGZWfJzcrP3XQf_vcGY1OiiwWHQE_pNVMAZZ4JxKjIV9lQTfIwBrVoHN-qwVUDVriy1UrkstStLZeSysub6YK-j0YPNOY2Lf0ImQXScQebd7XmYs_44DCoah5PB3gU0SfXe_fPlF6JJfy8</recordid><startdate>20130301</startdate><enddate>20130301</enddate><creator>Muñoz, Juan Carlos</creator><creator>Cortés, Cristián E.</creator><creator>Giesen, Ricardo</creator><creator>Sáez, Doris</creator><creator>Delgado, Felipe</creator><creator>Valencia, Francisco</creator><creator>Cipriano, Aldo</creator><general>Elsevier India Pvt Ltd</general><general>Elsevier</general><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7ST</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>SOI</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20130301</creationdate><title>Comparison of dynamic control strategies for transit operations</title><author>Muñoz, Juan Carlos ; Cortés, Cristián E. ; Giesen, Ricardo ; Sáez, Doris ; Delgado, Felipe ; Valencia, Francisco ; Cipriano, Aldo</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c454t-7de2734e28f16778aadef13826db1186c914c51fde63afc480147ab5e22502cb3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2013</creationdate><topic>Applied sciences</topic><topic>Exact sciences and technology</topic><topic>Ground, air and sea transportation, marine construction</topic><topic>Performance comparison</topic><topic>Road transportation and traffic</topic><topic>Transit control</topic><topic>Transit systems</topic><topic>Transportation planning, management and economics</topic><topic>Vehicle bunching</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Muñoz, Juan Carlos</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cortés, Cristián E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Giesen, Ricardo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sáez, Doris</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Delgado, Felipe</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Valencia, Francisco</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cipriano, Aldo</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><jtitle>Transportation research. Part C, Emerging technologies</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Muñoz, Juan Carlos</au><au>Cortés, Cristián E.</au><au>Giesen, Ricardo</au><au>Sáez, Doris</au><au>Delgado, Felipe</au><au>Valencia, Francisco</au><au>Cipriano, Aldo</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Comparison of dynamic control strategies for transit operations</atitle><jtitle>Transportation research. Part C, Emerging technologies</jtitle><date>2013-03-01</date><risdate>2013</risdate><volume>28</volume><spage>101</spage><epage>113</epage><pages>101-113</pages><issn>0968-090X</issn><eissn>1879-2359</eissn><abstract>► Two different headway-based transit control approaches are formulated and compared. ► Both approaches are tested over an identical set of operational scenarios. ► Both control strategies improve the level of service and its variability. ► The deterministic control is preferred when bus capacity is frequently reached. ► The hybrid predictive approach performs better when capacity is not an issue.
Real-time headway-based control is a key issue to reduce bus bunching in high frequency urban bus services where schedules are difficult to implement. Several mechanisms have been proposed in the literature, but very few performance comparisons are available. In this paper two different approaches are tested over eight different scenarios. Both methodologies solve the same problem, the former based on a deterministic optimization over a long-term rolling horizon, while the latter proposes a hybrid predictive approach considering a shorter horizon and a stochastic evolution of the system. The comparison is conducted through scenarios that include three different dimensions: (i) bus capacities which can be reached or not, (ii) service frequencies, considering high and medium frequency services and (iii) different load profiles along the corridor. The results show that the deterministic approach performs better under scenarios where bus capacity could be reached frequently along the route while the hybrid predictive control approach performs better in situations where this does not happen.</abstract><cop>Kidlington</cop><pub>Elsevier India Pvt Ltd</pub><doi>10.1016/j.trc.2012.12.010</doi><tpages>13</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0968-090X |
ispartof | Transportation research. Part C, Emerging technologies, 2013-03, Vol.28, p.101-113 |
issn | 0968-090X 1879-2359 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1323252305 |
source | Access via ScienceDirect (Elsevier) |
subjects | Applied sciences Exact sciences and technology Ground, air and sea transportation, marine construction Performance comparison Road transportation and traffic Transit control Transit systems Transportation planning, management and economics Vehicle bunching |
title | Comparison of dynamic control strategies for transit operations |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-25T14%3A26%3A33IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Comparison%20of%20dynamic%20control%20strategies%20for%20transit%20operations&rft.jtitle=Transportation%20research.%20Part%20C,%20Emerging%20technologies&rft.au=Mu%C3%B1oz,%20Juan%20Carlos&rft.date=2013-03-01&rft.volume=28&rft.spage=101&rft.epage=113&rft.pages=101-113&rft.issn=0968-090X&rft.eissn=1879-2359&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.trc.2012.12.010&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1323252305%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1323252305&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_els_id=S0968090X1200160X&rfr_iscdi=true |