Document Open Access Logo

Fewer Trains for Better Timetables: The Price of Fixed Line Frequencies in the Passenger-Oriented Timetabling Problem

Authors Pedro José Correia Duarte , Marie Schmidt , Dennis Huisman , Lucas P. Veelenturf

PDF

File

Thumbnail PDF
PDF
OASIcs.ATMOS.2023.8.pdf
  • Filesize: 1.25 MB
  • 18 pages

Document Identifiers

Subject Classification

ACM Subject Classification
  • Applied computing → Transportation
Keywords
  • PESP
  • Passenger Oriented Timetabling
  • Perceived Travel Time

Metrics

  • Access Statistics
  • Total Accesses (updated on a weekly basis)
    0
    PDF Downloads
    0
    Metadata Views

Abstract

This paper introduces the Passenger-Oriented Timetabling problem with flexible frequencies (POT-flex) in the context of railway planning problems. POT-flex aims at creating feasible railway timetables minimising total perceived passenger travel time. The contribution of the POT-flex lies in its relaxation of the generally adopted assumption that line frequencies should be a fixed part of the input. Instead, we consider flexible line frequencies, encompassing a minimum and maximum frequency per line, allowing the timetabling model to decide on optimal line frequencies to obtain better solutions using fewer train services per line. We develop a mixed-integer programming formulation for POT-flex based on the Passenger-Oriented Timetabling (POT) formulation of [Polinder et al., 2021] and compare the performance of the new formulation against the POT formulation on three instances. We find that POT-flex allows to find feasible timetables in instances containing bottlenecks, and show improvements of up to 2% on the largest instance tested. These improvements highlight the cost that fixed line frequencies can have on timetabling.

Cite As Get BibTex

Pedro José Correia Duarte, Marie Schmidt, Dennis Huisman, and Lucas P. Veelenturf. Fewer Trains for Better Timetables: The Price of Fixed Line Frequencies in the Passenger-Oriented Timetabling Problem. In 23rd Symposium on Algorithmic Approaches for Transportation Modelling, Optimization, and Systems (ATMOS 2023). Open Access Series in Informatics (OASIcs), Volume 115, pp. 8:1-8:18, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2023) https://doi.org/10.4230/OASIcs.ATMOS.2023.8

Author Details

Pedro José Correia Duarte
  • Econometric Institute, Erasmus Center for Optimization in Public Transport (ECOPT), Erasmus University Rotterdam, The Netherlands
Marie Schmidt
  • Institute of Computer Science, Faculty of Mathematics and Computer Science, Universität Würzburg, Germany
Dennis Huisman
  • Econometric Institute, Erasmus Center for Optimization in Public Transport (ECOPT), Erasmus University Rotterdam, The Netherlands
  • Process quality and Innovation, Netherlands Railways, Utrecht, The Netherlands
Lucas P. Veelenturf
  • Department of Technology and Operations Management, Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University, Rotterdam, The Netherlands

Funding

This project is co-funded by Netherlands Railways (NS).

References

  1. Eva Barrena, David Canca, Leandro C Coelho, and Gilbert Laporte. Single-line rail rapid transit timetabling under dynamic passenger demand. Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, 70:134-150, 2014. Google Scholar
  2. Michael R Bussieck, Thomas Winter, and Uwe T Zimmermann. Discrete optimization in public rail transport. Mathematical programming, 79(1):415-444, 1997. Google Scholar
  3. Florian Fuchs, Alessio Trivella, and Francesco Corman. Enhancing the interaction of railway timetabling and line planning with infrastructure awareness. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, 142:103805, 2022. Google Scholar
  4. Johann Hartleb and Marie Schmidt. Railway timetabling with integrated passenger distribution. European Journal of Operational Research, 298(3):953-966, 2022. Google Scholar
  5. Johann Hartleb, Marie Schmidt, Dennis Huisman, and Markus Friedrich. Modeling and solving line planning with integrated mode choice. Available at SSRN 3849985, 2021. Google Scholar
  6. Dennis Huisman, Leo G Kroon, Ramon M Lentink, and Michiel JCM Vromans. Operations research in passenger railway transportation. Statistica Neerlandica, 59(4):467-497, 2005. Google Scholar
  7. Mor Kaspi and Tal Raviv. Service-oriented line planning and timetabling for passenger trains. Transportation Science, 47(3):295-311, 2013. Google Scholar
  8. Christian Liebchen and Rolf H Möhring. The modeling power of the periodic event scheduling problem: railway timetables—and beyond. In Algorithmic methods for railway optimization, pages 3-40. Springer, 2007. Google Scholar
  9. Berenike Masing, Niels Lindner, and Christian Liebchen. Periodic timetabling with integrated track choice for railway construction sites. Technical report, Zuse Institute Berlin, 2022. Google Scholar
  10. Mathias Michaelis and Anita Schöbel. Integrating line planning, timetabling, and vehicle scheduling: a customer-oriented heuristic. Public Transport, 1(3):211-232, 2009. Google Scholar
  11. Gert-Jaap Polinder, Valentina Cacchiani, Marie Schmidt, and Dennis Huisman. An iterative heuristic for passenger-centric train timetabling with integrated adaption times. Computers & Operations Research, page 105740, 2022. Google Scholar
  12. Gert-Jaap Polinder, Leo Kroon, Karen Aardal, Marie Schmidt, and Marco Molinaro. Resolving infeasibilities in railway timetabling instances. Available at SSRN 3106739, 2018. Google Scholar
  13. Gert-Jaap Polinder, Marie Schmidt, and Dennis Huisman. Timetabling for strategic passenger railway planning. Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, 146:111-135, 2021. Google Scholar
  14. Philine Schiewe and Anita Schöbel. Periodic timetabling with integrated routing: Toward applicable approaches. Transportation Science, 54(6):1714-1731, 2020. Google Scholar
  15. Anita Schöbel. Line planning in public transportation: models and methods. OR spectrum, 34(3):491-510, 2012. Google Scholar
  16. Anita Schöbel. An eigenmodel for iterative line planning, timetabling and vehicle scheduling in public transportation. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, 74:348-365, 2017. Google Scholar
  17. Paolo Serafini and Walter Ukovich. A mathematical model for periodic scheduling problems. SIAM Journal on Discrete Mathematics, 2(4):550-581, 1989. Google Scholar
  18. Michael Siebert and Marc Goerigk. An experimental comparison of periodic timetabling models. Computers & Operations Research, 40(10):2251-2259, 2013. Google Scholar
  19. Raimond Wüst, Stephan Bütikofer, Severin Ess, Claudio Gomez, Albert Steiner, Marco Laumanns, and Jacint Szabo. Periodic timetabling with ‘track choice’-pesp based on given line concepts and mesoscopic infrastructure. In Operations Research Proceedings 2018: Selected Papers of the Annual International Conference of the German Operations Research Society (GOR), Brussels, Belgium, September 12-14, 2018, pages 571-578. Springer, 2019. Google Scholar
  20. Yuting Zhu, Baohua Mao, Yun Bai, and Shaokuan Chen. A bi-level model for single-line rail timetable design with consideration of demand and capacity. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, 85:211-233, 2017. Google Scholar
Questions / Remarks / Feedback
X

Feedback for Dagstuhl Publishing


Thanks for your feedback!

Feedback submitted

Could not send message

Please try again later or send an E-mail
© 2023-2025 Schloss Dagstuhl – LZI GmbH About DROPS Imprint Privacy Contact