Demand-driven timetable design for metro services
2014
- 16Usage
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
- Usage16
- Abstract Views16
Article Description
Timetable design is crucial to the metro service reliability. A straightforward and commonly adopted strategy in daily operation is a peak/off-peak-based schedule. However, such a strategy may fail to meet dynamic temporal passenger demand, resulting in long passenger waiting time at platforms and over-crowding in trains. Thanks to the emergence of smart card-based automated fare collection systems, we can now better quantify spatial–temporal demand on a microscopic level. In this paper, we formulate three optimization models to design demand-sensitive timetables by demonstrating train operation using equivalent time (interval). The first model aims at making the timetable more dynamic; the second model is an extension allowing for capacity constraints. The third model aims at designing a capacitated demand-sensitive peak/off-peak timetable. We assessed the performance of these three models and conducted sensitivity analyzes on different parameters on a metro line in Singapore, finding that dynamical timetable built with capacity constraints is most advantageous. Finally, we conclude our study and discuss the implications of the three models: the capacitated model provides a timetable which shows best performance under fixed capacity constraints, while the uncapacitated model may offer optimal temporal train configuration. Although we imposed capacity constraints when designing the optimal peak/off-peak timetable, its performance is not as good as models with dynamical headways. However, it shows advantages such as being easier to operate and more understandable to the passengers.
Bibliographic Details
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know