In urban evacuations, especially in response to an expected disaster, capacity reversibility (also known as contraflow) has been considered a workable strategy to reduce traffic congestion and to meet evacuation time deadlines. Currently, contraflow strategies are mostly planned by relying on engineering judgment because of the lack of appropriate large-scale decision support tools. A tabu search-based heuristic approach is introduced here that can be applied on realistic-size networks. The approach relies on insights from an analytical formulation of optimal reversibility design that reduces total system travel time. Computational results on a hypothetical and an urban network example network are presented and discussed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
UrbinaE., and WolshonB.. National Review of Hurricane Evacuation Plans and Policies: A Comparison and Contrast of State Policies.Transportation Research, Vol. 37A, March 2003, pp. 257–275.
2.
How Georgia DOT Dealt with Hurricane Floyd.Better Roads, Vol. 70, No. 5, May 2000, pp. 28–29.
3.
WhittenD. L.Evacuation Safety Measures for Floyd Force Shutdown on Eastern Seaboard.Transport Topics, No. 3347, Sept. 20, 1999, p. 2.
4.
Florida Department of Transportation Governor's Hurricane Evacuation Task Force Report—Executive Summary.Florida Police Chief, Vol. 26, No. 6, June 2000, pp. 12–13.
GivensG. G.Disaster Duty—Prepare to Evacuate, Prime for Alert.Traffic Digest and Review, Vol. 11, No. 6, June 1963, pp. 4–7.
7.
HoustonW.An Evacuation Model.IS&EP Branch Working Paper. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C., 1975.
8.
SheffiY., MahmassaniH., and PowellW. B.. Evacuation Studies for Nuclear Power Plant Sites: A New Challenge for Transportation Engineers.ITE Journal, Vol. 51, No. 6, June 1981, pp. 25–28.
9.
SheffiY., MahmassaniH., and PowellW. B.. A Transportation Network Evacuation Model.Transportation Research, Vol. 16A, No. 3, May 1982, pp. 209–218.
10.
KanenA. C.Evacuation Planning Package. Presented at 61st Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 1982.
11.
CosbyJ. C., and PowersD. L.. Simulation of Traffic in Emergency Evacuations. Presented at 61st Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 1982.
12.
LiebermanE.DYNEV: A Dynamic Evacuation Model. Presented at 61st Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 1982.
13.
HanA. F.TEVACS—Decision Support System for Evacuation Planning in Taiwan.Journal of Transportation Engineering, Vol. 116, No. 6, Nov.–Dec. 1990, pp. 821–830.
14.
BarrettB., RanB., and PillaiR.. Developing a Dynamic Traffic Management Modeling Framework for Hurricane Evacuation. In Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 1733, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 2000, pp. 115–121.
15.
SattayhatewaP., and RanB.. Developing a Dynamic Traffic Management Model for Nuclear Power Plant Evacuation. Presented at 79th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 2000.
16.
LuoA. T., MaguireS. J., and ChangE. C.. Analysis of Traffic Modeling for Evacuation Systems.Securing Our Future: ITS America 12th Annual Meeting and Exposition, Conference Proceedings, Long Beach, Calif., 2002.
17.
Evacuation Travel Demand Forecasting System. In Southeast United States Hurricane Evacuation Traffic Study, Technical Memorandum 2 PBS&J, Feb. 2000.
18.
FranzeseO., and HanL. D.. Methodology for the Assessment of Traffic Management Strategies for Large-Scale Emergency Evacuations.ITS Connecting the Americas: ITS America 11th Annual Meeting and Exposition, Conference Proceedings, Miami Beach, Fla., 2001.
19.
TuydesH., and ZiliaskopoulosA. K.. Network Redesign to Optimize Evacuation Contraflow. Presented at 83rd Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 2004.
20.
ZiliaskopoulosA. K.A Linear Programming Model for the Single Destination System Optimum Dynamic Traffic Assignment Problem.Transportation Science, Vol. 34, No. 1, 2000, pp. 37–49.
21.
LiY., ZiliaskopoulosA. K., and WallerS. T.. Linear Programming Formulations for System Optimum Dynamic Traffic Assignment with Arrival Time-Based and Departure Time-Based Demands. In Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 1667, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1999, pp. 52–59.
22.
DaganzoF. C.The Cell Transmission Model: A Dynamic Representation of Highway Traffic Consistent with the Hydrodynamic Theory.Transportation Research, Vol. 28B, No. 4, Aug. 1994, pp. 269–287.
23.
DaganzoF. C.The Cell Transmission Model. II. Network Traffic.Transportation Research, Vol. 29B, 1995, pp. 79–93.
24.
GloverF.Heuristics for Integer Programming Using Surrogate Constraints.Decision Sciences, Vol. 8, 1977, pp. 56–166.
25.
GloverF.Tabu SearchI.Operations Research Society of American Journal on Computing, Vol. 1, 1989, pp. 190–206.
26.
GloverF. Tabu Search, II. Operations Research Society of American Journal on Computing, Vol. 2, 1990, pp. 4–32.
27.
NowickiE., and SmutnickiC.. A Fast Taboo Search Algorithm for the Job-Shop Problem.Management Science, Vol. 42, No. 6, 1996, pp. 797–813.
28.
LagunaM., and GloverF.. Bandwidth Packing: A Tabu Search Approach.Management Science, Vol. 39, No. 4, 1993, pp. 492–500.
29.
MouskosK.A Tabu-Based Heuristic Search Strategy to Solve a Discrete Transportation Equilibrium Network Design Problem. Ph.D. dissertation. University of Texas, Austin, 1991.
30.
ChangY., SawayaO. B., and ZiliaskopoulosA. K.. A Tabu Search Approach for Work Zone Scheduling. Presented at 80th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 2001.
31.
CarvellJ. D., and HibbardJ. L.. Reversible Lane Systems: A Strategy for Relieving Freeway Reconstruction. In Compendium of Technical Papers, Institute of Transportation Engineers 62nd Annual Meeting, Washington, D.C., 1992, pp. 461–465.
32.
MarkovetzS., RoyerD., and DorrohR. F.. Leetsdale Drive Reversible Lane Design Study, Denver, Colorado. In Compendium of Technical Papers, Institute of Transportation Engineers 65th Annual Meeting, Washington, D.C., 1995, pp. 142–146.
33.
AndersonM. E., and MurphyD. G.. REVLAC—Turning the flow in Chicago.Traffic Technology International, Feb.–March, 1998, pp. 41–45.
34.
LalaniN., and BairdA. L.. Right Way for Wrong Way Driving.ITE Journal, Vol. 51, No. 4, 1981, pp. 16–24.
35.
WalkerD. T.Jr., and MichaelG. R.. Fiberoptics Improve Reversible Lane System.Public Works, Vol. 116, No. 7, 1985, pp. 62–63.
36.
KubelL., and WherryL.. Changing Direction: A Reversible Lane on Interstate 80 in San Diego Will Help Ease the Morning and Evening Commute.Going Places, Nov.–Dec., 1988, pp. 20–23.
37.
ChingS. M. O. T.Uni-Directional Lane Markers Reversible Roadway Applications in Seattle, Washington. In Compendium of Technical Papers, Institute of Transportation Engineers 59th Annual Meeting, Washington, D.C., 1989, pp. 293–295.
38.
BrethertonW. M., and ElhajM.. Is a Reversible Lane System Safe? In Compendium of Technical Papers, Institute of Transportation Engineers 66th Annual Meeting, Washington, D.C., 1996, pp. 277–281.
39.
ArdekaniS. A., and HobeikaA. G.. Logistic Problems in the Aftermath of Mexico City Earthquake.Transportation Quarterly, Vol. 42, 1988, pp. 107–124.
WallerS. T., and ZiliaskopoulosA. K.. An Internet-Based Geographic Information System That Integrates Data, Models and Users for Transportation Applications.Transportation Research, Vol. 8C, No. 1/6 (Feb./Dec.), 2000, pp. 427–444.
42.
WolseyL. A.Integer Programming.John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, 1998.
