We propose a new structured transit system with flexible bus line length based on the real-time requests of passengers. This operation mode can meet the travel demands of passengers (lower travel-time cost) and reduce the number of unnecessary stops (without boarding or alighting activities). We then compare the performance of the proposed transit system with that of fixed-route transit service and show the pros and cons of each system for several passenger demand levels. It is found that at low-to-moderate demand levels, the proposed flexible-route system tends to provide the lowest total travel time. In comparing a real-world deployment of the system in Guangzhou with comparable alternative system states, the optimization of the former is evident in idle and tidal modes, in which the total travel times reduced by more than 10%. Moreover, this operating system can achieve enhanced performance with the development of automated vehicle technology in the future.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
KimM. E.SchonfeldP.Integration of Conventional and Flexible Bus Services with Timed Transfers. Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Vol. 68, 2014, pp. 76–97.
2.
NourbakhshS. M.OuyangY.A Structured Flexible Transit System for Low Demand Areas. Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Vol. 46, No. 1, 2012, pp. 204–216.
3.
KimM. E.SchonfeldP.Integrating Bus Services with Mixed Fleets. Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Vol. 55, 2013, pp. 227–244.
4.
KimM. E.SchonfeldP.Integration of Conventional and Flexible Bus Services with Timed Transfers. Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Vol. 68, 2014, pp. 76–97.
5.
ChangS. K.SchonfeldP. M.Optimization Models for Comparing Conventional and Subscription Bus Feeder Services. Transportation Science, Vol. 25, No. 4, 1991, pp. 281–298.
6.
KimM.SchonfeldP.Conventional, Flexible and Variable-Type Services. Journal of Transportation Engineering, Vol. 138, No. 3, 2012, pp. 1–11.
7.
WilsonH.SussmanJ.WangH.HigonnetB.Scheduling Algorithms for a Dial-a-Ride System. Technical Report USL TR-70-13. Urban Systems Laboratory, MIT, Cambridge, MA, 1971.
8.
ErricoF.CrainicT. G.MalucelliF.NonatoM.A Survey on Planning Semi-Flexible Transit Systems: Methodological Issues and a Unifying Framework. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, Vol. 36, 2013, pp. 324–338.
9.
QuadrifoglioL.HallR. W.DessoukyM. M.Performance and Design of Mobility Allowance Shuttle Transit Services: Bounds on the Maximum Longitudinal Velocity. Transportation Science, Vol. 40, No. 3, 2006, pp. 351–363.
10.
DianaM.DessoukyM. M.XiaN.A Model for the Fleet Sizing of Demand Responsive Transportation Services with Time Windows. Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Vol. 40, No. 8, 2006, pp. 651–666.
QuadrifoglioL.DessoukyM. M.OrdóñezF.A Simulation Study of Demand Responsive Transit System Design. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Vol. 42, No. 4, pp. 718–737.
13.
LiX.QuadrifoglioL.Optimal Zone Design for Feeder Transit Services. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 2009. 2111: 100–108.
14.
AlshalalfahB.ShalabyA.Feasibility of Flex-Route as a Feeder Transit Service to Rail Stations in the Suburbs: Case Study in Toronto. Journal of Urban Planning & Development, Vol. 138, No. 1, 2012, pp. 90–100.
15.
QuadrifoglioL.DessoukyM. M.Sensitivity Analyses over the Service Area for Mobility Allowance Shuttle Transit (MAST) Services. Lecture Notes in Economics & Mathematical Systems, Vol. 600, 2008, pp. 419–432.
16.
QuadrifoglioL.DessoukyM. M.OrdóñezF. and F. Mobility Allowance Shuttle Transit (MAST) Services: MIP Formulation and Strengthening with Logic Constraints. European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 185, No. 2, 2008, pp. 481–494.
17.
LuX.YuJ.YangX.PanS.ZouN.Flexible Feeder Transit Route Design to Enhance Service Accessibility in Urban Area. Journal of Advance Transportation Banner, Vol. 50, No. 4, 2016, pp. 507–521.
18.
HalanD.Self-Driving Cars: The Next Revolution. Center for Automotive Research, Ann Arbor, MI, 2014.
19.
SotoG.LarrainH.MuñozJ. C.A New Solution Framework for the Limited-Stop Bus Service Design Problem. Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Vol. 105, 2017, pp. 67–85.
20.
NourinejadM.BahramiS.RoordaM. J.Designing Parking Facilities for Autonomous Vehicles. Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Vol. 109, 2018, pp. 110–127.
21.
ShenY.ZhangH.ZhaoJ.Integrating Shared Autonomous Vehicle in Public Transportation System: A Supply-Side Simulation of the First-Mile Service in Singapore. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Vol. 113, 2018, pp. 125–136.
22.
CorreiaG. H. D. A.van AremB.Solving the User Optimum Privately Owned Automated Vehicles Assignment Problem (UO-POAVAP): A Model to Explore the Impacts of Self-Driving Vehicles on Urban Mobility. Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Vol. 87, 2016, pp. 64–88.
23.
FagnantD. J.KockelmanK. M.The Travel and Environmental Implications of Shared Autonomous Vehicles, Using Agent-Based Model Scenarios. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, Vol. 40, 2014, pp. 1–13.
24.
HabouchaC. J.IshaqR.ShiftanY.User Preferences Regarding Autonomous Vehicles. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, Vol. 78, 2017, pp. 37–49.
