Rail modeling and simulation is an effective decision support instrument for planning and designing complex rail infrastructures and operations. To successfully support these activities at a large scale, the simulation model should be sufficiently detailed and yet be computationally efficient. This poses a set of challenges pertaining to the design of the models. In this paper, we propose a component-based light-rail modeling and simulation library in the discrete event system specification (DEVS) formalism. The proposed library is described in detail and is shown to be efficient and scalable. We conclude the paper by offering a set of good design principles derived from this experience, which are also relevant to other types of large-scale infrastructure system simulation model design.
ZeiglerBPPraehoferHKimTG.Theory of modeling and simulation: Integrating discrete event and continuous complex dynamic systems. 2nd ed.New York, NY: Elsevier/Academic Press, 2000.
3.
HoYC.Discrete event dynamic systems: Analyzing complexity and performance in the modern world. New York, NY: IEEE, 1994.
4.
WainerGA.Discrete-event modeling and simulation: A practitioner’s approach (Computational Analysis, Synthesis, and Design of Dynamic Systems). Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press, 2009.
5.
ParedisCJJDiaz-CalderonASinhaR. Composable models for simulation-based design. Eng Comput2001; 17(2): 112–128.
6.
LiangVCParedisCJJ. A port ontology for conceptual design of systems. J Comput Inf Sci Eng2004; 4(3): 206–217.
7.
BreedveldPC. Port-based modeling of dynamic systems. In: DuindamVMacchelliAStramigioliS. (eds) Modeling and control of complex physical systems: The Port-Hamiltonian approach. Berlin: Springer-Verlag, 2009, pp. 1–52.
8.
De LaraJVangheluweHAlfonsecaM. Meta-modelling and graph grammars for multi-paradigm modelling in AToM3. Softw Syst Model2004; 3(3): 194–209.
9.
VangheluweH. DEVS as a common denominator for multi-formalism hybrid systems modelling. In: IEEE international symposium on computer-aided control system design, 2000, pp. 129–134.
10.
VangheluweH. Foundations of modelling and simulation of complex systems. In: Electronic communications of the EASST – proceedings of the 7th international workshop on graph transformation and visual modeling techniques, 2008.
11.
LiKPGaoZY.An improved equation model for the train movement. Simul Modell Pract Theor2007; 15(9): 1156–1162.
12.
LiKPGaoZYNingB.Cellular automaton model for railway traffic. J Comput Phys2005; 209(1): 179–192.
13.
MiddelkoopDBouwmanM.SIMONE: Large scale train network simulations. In: Proceedings of the 2001 winter simulation conference, 2001, pp. 1042–1047.
14.
LuQDessoukyMLeachmanRC.Modeling train movements through complex rail networks. ACM Trans Model Comput Simul2004; 14(1): 48–75.
15.
LiKPMaoBHGaoZY.An improved walk model for train movement on railway network. Commun Theor Phys2009; 51(6): 979–984.
16.
ZeiglerBPLeeJS. Theory of quantized systems: Formal basis for DEVS/HLA distributed simulation environment. In: Proceedings of SPIE – The International Society for Optical Engineering, 1998, pp. 49–58.
17.
GiambiasiNEscudeBGhoshS.GDEVS: A generalized discrete event specification for accurate modeling of dynamic systems. Trans SCS2000; 17(3): 120–134.
18.
KofmanE.Quantization-based simulation of differential algebraic equation systems. Simul2003; 79(7): 363–376.
CareyMLockwoodD.A model, algorithms and strategy for train pathing. J Oper Res Soc1995; 46(8): 988–1005.
21.
RizzoliAEFornaraNGambardellaLM.A simulation tool for combined rail/road transport in intermodal terminals. J Math Comput Simul2002; 59(1–3): 57–71.
22.
CareyMCarvilleS.Testing schedule performance and reliability for train stations. J Oper Res Soc2002; 51(6): 666–682.
23.
CareyMCarvilleS.Scheduling and platforming trains at busy complex stations. Transp Res A Pol Prac2003; 37(3): 195–224.
24.
WahlborgM.Simulation models: Important aids for Banverket’s planning process. In: BrebbiaCAAllanJHillJ. (eds) Computers in railways, vol. 5. Southampton, UK: WIT Press, 1996, pp. 175–181.
25.
SandbladBAnderssonAJonssonKE. A train traffic operation and planning simulator. Adv Transp2000; 7: 241–248.
26.
BendfeldtJPMohrUMullerL.RailSys, a system to plan future railway needs. Adv Transp2000; 7: 249–255.
27.
KaasAH.Punctuality model for railways. Adv Transp2000; 7: 853–860.
28.
KavickaAKlimaV.Simulation support for railway infrastructure design and planning processes. Adv Transp2000; 7: 447–456.
29.
HoTKMaoBHYuanZZ. Computer simulation and modeling in railway applications. Comput Phys Commun2002; 143(1): 1–10.
30.
NashAHuerlimannD.Railroad simulation using OpenTrack. Adv Transp2004; 15: 45–54.
31.
KoutsopoulosHNWangZ.Simulation of urban rail operations: Application framework. Transp Res Rec J Transp Res Board2007; 2006: 84–91.
32.
RudolphR. Operational simulation of light rail systems. In: Proceedings of the European transport conference, 2000, pp. 167–178.
33.
OvertonDT. Traffic signal control of LRVs. In: IEE colloquium on light rapid transit on-street, 1989, pp. 9/1–9/3.
34.
SolHG.Simulation in information systems development. PhD Thesis, University of Groningen, the Netherlands, 1982.
35.
KeenPGSolHG.Decision enhancement services: Rehearsing the future for decisions that matter. Amsterdam, the Netherlands: IOS Press, 2008.
36.
HofmannM.Criteria for decomposing systems into components in modeling and simulation: Lessons learned with military simulations. Simul2004; 80(7–8): 357–365.
37.
PettyMDWeiselEW. A formal basis for a theory of semantic composability. In: Proceedings of the spring 2003 simulation interoperability workshop, 2003.
38.
VerbraeckASaanenYStojanovicZ. What are building blocks? In: VerbraeckADahanayakANW (eds) Building blocks for effective telematics application development and evaluation. Delft, the Netherlands: TU Delft, 2002, pp. 8–21.
BraudeEJBernsteinME.Software engineering: Modern approaches. 2nd ed.New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons, 2010.
41.
FowlerM.Refactoring: Improving the design of existing code. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, 1999.
42.
BanksJ.Handbook of simulation: Principles, methodology, advances, applications, and practice. New York, NY: Wiley Interscience, 1998.
43.
FujimotoRM.Parallel and distributed simulation systems (Wiley Series on Parallel and Distributed Computing). New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons, 2000.
44.
CrnkovicIStaffordJSzyperskiC.Software components beyond programming: From routines to services. IEEE Softw2011; 28(3): 22–26.
45.
YilmazL.On the need for contextualized introspective models to improve reuse and composability of defense simulations. J Defen Model Simul Appl Method Tech2004; 1(3): 141–151.
46.
SzaboCTeoYM. On syntactic composability and model reuse. In: Proceedings of the international conference on modeling and simulation, 2007, pp. 230–237.
47.
TolkADialloSYKingRD. Conceptual modeling for composition of model-based complex systems. In: RobinsonSBrooksRKotiadisK. (eds) Conceptual modeling for discrete-event simulation. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press, 2010, pp. 355–381.
LeeJKLimYHChiSD.Hierarchical modeling and simulation environment for intelligent transportation systems. Simul2004; 80(2): 61–76.
50.
WainerG.ATLAS: A language to specify traffic models using Cell-DEVS. Simul Modell Prac Theor2006; 14(3): 313–337.
51.
TheegGVlasenkoS.Railway signalling & interlocking: International compendium. Hamburg, Germany: Eurailpress, 2009.
52.
HuangY.Automated simulation model generation. PhD Thesis, Delft University of Technology, Delft, the Netherlands, 2013.
53.
VuchicVR.Urban transit: Operations, planning, and economics. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons, 2005.
54.
KnuthDE.The art of computer programming, volume 1: Fundamental algorithms. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Professional, 1997.
55.
CormenTHLeisersonCERivestRL. Introduction to algorithms. 3rd ed.New York, NY: MIT Press and McGraw-Hill, 2001.
56.
AlstrupSGavoilleCKaplanH. Nearest common ancestors: A survey and a new algorithm for a distributed environment. Theor Comput Syst2004; 37: 441–456.
57.
GammaEHelmRJohnsonR. Design patterns: Elements of reusable object-oriented software. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, 1994.
58.
ViegaJTuttBBehrendsR.Automated delegation is a viable alternative to multiple inheritance in class based languages. Charlottesville, VA: Microsoft Corporation, 1998.
59.
KofmanELeeJSZeiglerBP. DEVS representation of differential equation systems: Review of recent advances. In: Proceedings of the 2001 European simulation symposium, 2001.
60.
GiambiasiNCarmonaJC.Generalized discrete event abstraction of continuous systems: GDEVS formalism. Simul Modell Prac Theor2006; 14(1): 47–70.
61.
HuangYSeckMDVerbraeckA.LIBROS-II: Railway modelling with DEVS. In: Proceedings of the 2010 winter simulation conference, Baltimore, MD, 2010.
62.
KanaciloEMVerbraeckA.A distributed multi-formalism simulation to support rail infrastructure control design. In: Proceedings of the 2005 winter simulation conference, 2005, pp. 2546–2553.
63.
KanaciloEMVerbraeckA. Simulation services to support the control design of rail infrastructures. In: Proceedings of the 2006 winter simulation conference, 2006, pp. 1372–1379.
64.
KanaciloEMVerbraeckA. Assessing tram schedules using a library of simulation components. In: Proceedings of the 2007 winter simulation conference, 2007, pp. 1878–1886.
65.
JacobsPHM. The DSOL simulation suite – Enabling multi-formalism simulation in a distributed context. PhD Thesis, Delft University of Technology, Delft, the Netherlands, 2005.
66.
SeckMDVerbraeckA.DEVS in DSOL: Adding DEVS operational semantics to a generic event-scheduling simulation environment. In: Proceedings of the 2009 summer computer simulation conference, 2009.
67.
EugsterPTFelberPAGuerraouiR. The many faces of publish/subscribe. ACM Comput Surv2003; 35(2): 114–131.
68.
CaiJ.Assessing the impact of capacity of depots and vehicle schedule in transportation systems. Master’s Thesis, Delft University of Technology, Delft, the Netherlands, 2011.
69.
Van AntwerpenH. Rail simulation suite development. BA Thesis, De Haagse Hogeschool, The Hague, the Netherlands, 2011.
