The dynamic behavior of factors such as product demand, travel distance, fuel price, and vehicle characteristics influencing the transportation system makes it challenging to develop a sustainable transportation model for predicting the system’s adaptability in the future. Hence, the present study proposes a novel quantitative model simulated using the system dynamics approach to visualize the influence of the considered dynamic factors of the sustainability objectives. Ensemble learning is employed across four machine learning algorithms to enhance the accuracy and reliability of predictions for the dynamic behavior of the model, considering a specific case scenario. Sobol sensitivity analysis is performed to visualize the relationships between input and output variables. Five quantitative scenario analyses have been conducted to explore the system’s future state under uncertainty. The results indicate that fuel price, vehicle speed, and product demand are crucial input parameters, while transportation costs exhibit substantial fluctuations as an output in the sustainable transportation problem.
DhageSSNarwaneVSRautRD, et al. Mathematical programming model to optimise an environmentally constructed supply chain: a genetic algorithm approach. Int J Oper Res2022; 44(2): 226–253. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJOR.2022.123395
PaulAMahapatraSS. A comprehensive study on time-dependent multi-objective sustainable vehicle routing problem considering real-time traffic congestion. Proc Inst Mech Eng Part D: J Automob Eng. Epub ahead of print 13September2025. https://doi.org/10.1177/09544070251366346
4.
ZhangWZhangMWuS, et al. A complex path model for low-carbon sustainable development of enterprise based on system dynamics. J Clean Prod2021; 321: 128934. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.128934
YangY. Development of the regional freight transportation demand prediction models based on the regression analysis methods. Neurocomputing2015; 158: 42–47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neucom.2015.01.069
7.
AhrensAErsoyEIakovlevV, et al. An introduction to stacking regression for economists. In: SriboonchittaSKreinovichVYamakaW (eds) International conference of the Thailand Econometrics Society. Springer International Publishing, 2022, pp. 7–29. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-97273-8_2
8.
PavlyshenkoB. Using stacking approaches for machine learning models. In: 2018 IEEE second international conference on data stream mining & processing (DSMP), Lviv, Ukraine, 21–25 August 2018, pp. 255–258. IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/DSMP.2018.8478522
9.
BaraheniMSoudmandBHAminiS, et al. Stacked generalization ensemble learning strategy for multivariate prediction of delamination and maximum thrust force in composite drilling. J Compos Mater2024; 58(30): 3113–3138. https://doi.org/10.1177/00219983241289494
10.
Avila-TorresPCaballeroRLitvinchevI, et al. The urban transport planning with uncertainty in demand and travel time: a comparison of two defuzzification methods. J Ambient Intell Humaniz Comput2018; 9(3): 843–856. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12652-017-0545-x
11.
SuryaniEHendrawanRAAdiprajaPF, et al. System dynamics simulation model for urban transportation planning: a case study. Int J Simul Model2020; 19(1): 5–16. https://doi.org/10.2507/IJSIMM19-1-493
12.
HuWDongJHwangBG, et al. Using system dynamics to analyze the development of urban freight transportation system based on rail transit: a case study of Beijing. Sustain Cities Soc2020; 53: 101923. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2019.101923
13.
AnderluhANolzPCHemmelmayrVC, et al. Multi-objective optimization of a two-echelon vehicle routing problem with vehicle synchronization and ‘grey zone’ customers arising in urban logistics. Eur J Oper Res2021; 289: 940–958. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2019.07.049
14.
GhaemiSAHadji HosseinlouM. Modeling the urban freight-transportation system using the system dynamics approach. Systems2023; 11(8): 409. https://doi.org/10.3390/systems11080409
15.
JiXZhaiYFuS, et al. Towards the sustainable development of logistics system model: a system dynamics approach. PLoS One2023; 18(1): e0279687. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0279687
16.
HowickSMegiddoI. A framework for conceptualising hybrid system dynamics and agent-based simulation models. Eur J Oper Res2024; 315(3): 1153–1166. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2024.01.027
17.
AjayiBOBamisayeMEMacedoHM, et al. Integrating system dynamics and machine learning for environmental impact analysis of building materials in the demolition process. Sci Rep2025; 15(1): 27114. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-06737-9
18.
da SilvaMRAgostinoIRFrazzonEM. Integration of machine learning and simulation for dynamic rescheduling in truck appointment systems. Simul Model Pract Theory2023; 125: 102747. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.simpat.2023.102747
19.
KhamenehRTBarkerKRamirez-MarquezJE. A hybrid machine learning and simulation framework for modeling and understanding disinformation-induced disruptions in public transit systems. Reliab Eng Syst Saf2025; 255: 110656. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2024.110656
20.
Bafandegan EmrooziVKazemiMPooyaA, et al. Evaluating human error probability in maintenance task: an integrated system dynamics and machine learning approach. Hum Factors Ergon Manuf Serv Ind2025; 35(1): e21057. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2024.2383293
21.
BussiewekeFMulaJCampuzano-BolarinF. Optimisation of recovery policies in the era of supply chain disruptions: a system dynamics and reinforcement learning approach. Int J Prod Res2025; 63(5): 1649–1673. https://doi.org/10.1002/hfm.21057
22.
RahmandadHAkhavanAJalaliMS. Incorporating deep learning into system dynamics: amortized Bayesian inference for scalable likelihood-free parameter estimation. Syst Dyn Rev2025; 41(1): e1798. https://doi.org/10.1002/sdr.1798
23.
PokharelRMillerEJChappleK. Modeling car dependency and policies towards sustainable mobility: a system dynamics approach. Transp Res D Transp Environ2023; 125: 103978. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2023.103978
24.
FontouraWBRadzickiMJRibeiroGM. Using system dynamics to understand long-term impact of new mobility services and sustainable mobility policies: an analysis pre-and post-COVID-19 pandemic in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Transp Lett2024; 16(7): 751–763. https://doi.org/10.1080/19427867.2023.2237276
25.
GockenTDosdogruATBoruA, et al. Integrating process plan and part routing using optimization via simulation approach. Int J Simul Model2019; 18(2): 254–266. https://doi.org/10.2507/IJSIMM18(2)470
26.
FontesCHFreiresFG. Sustainable and renewable energy supply chain: a system dynamics overview. Renew Sustain Energy Rev2018; 82: 247–259. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2017.09.033
27.
YuanTda Rocha NetoWRothenbergCE, et al. Machine learning for next-generation intelligent transportation systems: a survey. Trans Emerg Telecomm Technol2022; 33(4): e4427. https://doi.org/10.1002/ett.4427
28.
LiJBoonaertJDoniecA, et al. Multi-models machine learning methods for traffic flow estimation from floating car data. Transp Res Part C Emerg Technol2021; 132: 103389. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trc.2021.103389
29.
AoYLiHZhuL, et al. The linear random forest algorithm and its advantages in machine learning assisted logging regression modeling. J Pet Sci Eng2019; 174: 776–789. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.petrol.2018.11.067
30.
TouzaniSGrandersonJFernandesS. Gradient boosting machine for modeling the energy consumption of commercial buildings. Energy Build2018; 158: 1533–1543. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2017.11.039
31.
FanZGouJWengS. A feature importance-based multi-layer catboost for student performance prediction. IEEE Trans Knowl Data Eng2024; 36(11): 5495–5507. https://doi.org/10.1109/TKDE.2024.3393472
32.
CuleEDe IorioM. Ridge regression in prediction problems: automatic choice of the ridge parameter. Genet Epidemiol2013; 37(7): 704–714. https://doi.org/10.1002/gepi.21750
33.
ErcanTOnatNCTatariO. Investigating carbon footprint reduction potential of public transportation in United States: a system dynamics approach. J Clean Prod2016; 133: 1260–1276. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.06.051
SchwaningerMGrösserS. System dynamics modeling: validation for quality assurance. In: MeyersRA (ed.) Encyclopedia of complexity and systems science. Springer, 2018, pp. 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-27737-5
KumarDSinghAKumarP, et al. Sobol sensitivity analysis for risk assessment of uranium in groundwater. Environ Geochem Health2020; 42(6): 1789–1801. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10653-020-00522-5
39.
AlBaraghthehTWillumeit-RömerRZeller-PlumhoffB. Best practices in developing a workflow for uncertainty quantification for modeling the biodegradation of Mg-based implants. Adv Sci2024; 11(46): 2403543. https://doi.org/10.1002/advs.202403543
40.
AsgarpourSHartmannAGkiotsalitisK, et al. Scenario-based strategic modeling of road transport demand and performance. Transp Res Rec2023; 2677(5): 1415–1440. https://doi.org/10.1177/03611981221143377
41.
ChuaYJSoudagarINgSH, et al. Impact analysis of environmental policies on shipping fleet planning under demand uncertainty. Transp Res D Transp Environ2023; 120: 103744.
42.
MilewskaBMilewskiD. Implications of increasing fuel costs for supply chain strategy. Energies2022; 15(19): 6934. https://doi.org/10.3390/en15196934
43.
LitmanT. Efficient vehicles versus efficient transportation. Comparing transportation energy conservation strategies. Transp Policy2005; 12(2): 121–129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2004.12.002
44.
ZaroukYMahdaviIRezaeianJ, et al. A novel multi-objective green vehicle routing and scheduling model with stochastic demand, supply, and variable travel times. Comput Oper Res2022; 141: 105698. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cor.2022.105698
45.
ZhangZDemirEMasonR, et al. Understanding freight drivers’ behavior and the impact on vehicles’ fuel consumption and CO2e emissions. Oper Res2023; 23(4): 59. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12351-023-00798-2
46.
MunyonVVBowenWMHolcombeJ. Vehicle fuel economy and vehicle miles traveled: an empirical investigation of Jevon’s Paradox. Energy Res Social Sci2018; 38: 19–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2018.01.007
47.
EdelenboschOYVan VuurenDPBertramC, et al. Transport fuel demand responses to fuel price and income projections: comparison of integrated assessment models. Transp Res D Transp Environ2017; 55: 310–321. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2017.03.005
