Uncertainty in vulnerability of metro transit networks: A global perspective
2023
- 1Usage
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Usage1
- Abstract Views1
Article Description
This study measures the “uncertainty in vulnerability” of 50 metro transit networks in the most populated cities across the globe under benign and malicious attack scenarios. Uncertainty in vulnerability delineates the gap between the performance loss trajectory formed by link percolation under benign and malicious attacks. Three observations are discerned. First, vulnerability and uncertainty in vulnerability are a function of both size and physics of the network explained by connectivity measures. A 1% increase in the ratio of links to nodes increases the vulnerability by 0.50% and increases the uncertainty in vulnerability by 2.24%. A 1% increase in the ratio of the number of links to the maximum possible number of links decreases vulnerability by 0.03% and the uncertainty in vulnerability by 0.12%. Second, the topology of metro transit networks with <100 nodes follows one of the three analogous forms of tree-shaped networks, networks with one undirected cycle, or single depot networks, while the topology of metro transit networks with ≥100 nodes is closer to grid and matching pairs. Third, metro transit networks (i) are less likely to resume the operation under malicious attacks, (ii) are more likely to resume the operation under benign attacks, and (iii) are susceptible to both severe and non-severe degradations under random attacks. Overall, it is shown that the most vulnerable transit networks experience the maximal uncertainty in vulnerability and own a topology analogous to a single depot. New York, Delhi, and London metro transit networks have the most vulnerable topology. Ahmedabad, Mumbai, and Sydney metro transit networks have the least vulnerable topology.
Bibliographic Details
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know