Since the appearance of mechanized rail transport systems in England in the 1820s, the railway has evolved as an essential service and has become the primary mode of long-distance land transportation for people as well as for bulk material across the world. It is essential for every railway organization to maintain high quality of service to not only differentiate itself and create a competitive edge over other modes of transport but also to survive. Factors such as speed, reliability, passenger comfort, convenience, system safety, special services, innovations, efficiency, itinerary accuracy and so on are important to ensure satisfactory services. The locomotive assignment problem (LAP) is one problem which, if addressed properly, would go a long way to improve the quality of services provided by the railway organization. In this work, we thoroughly study the literature pertaining to LAP to identify the constraints that have been considered hitherto by various authors. We also try to single out constraints that are relevant but ignored by most of the studies. Finally, we review studies that are specific to the Indian context and highlight the scope for further work.
AgarwalR. (2008). Public transportation and customer satisfaction: The case of Indian Railways. Global Business Review, 9(2), 257–272.
2.
AhujaR. K., LiuJ., OrlinJ. B., SharmaD., & ShughartL. A. (2005). Solving real-life locomotive-scheduling problems. Transportation Science, 39(4), 503–517.
3.
AhujaR. K., ShughartL. A., LiuJ., & VaidyanathanB. (2006). An optimization-based approach for locomotive planning (Technical report). Innovative Scheduling, Gainesville, FL. Retrieved 15December2015, from http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.122.7865&rep=rep1&type=pdf
4.
Al-AminM., ForbesM. A., & NobleD. H. (1999). Production of locomotive rosters for a multi-class single-locomotive problem. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 50(10), 1004–1010.
5.
AllenW. G.Jr., & DiCesareF. (1976). Transit service evaluation: Preliminary identification of variables characterizing level of service. Transportation Research Record, 606, 41–47.
6.
AssadA. A. (1980). Modelling of rail networks: Toward a routing/makeup model. Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, 14(1), 101–114.
7.
BharillR., & RangarajN. (2008). Revenue management in railway operations: A study of the Rajdhani Express, Indian Railways. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 42(9), 1195–1207.
8.
BogartD., & ChaudharyL. (2012). Regulation, ownership, and costs: A historical perspective from Indian Railways. American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, 4(1), 28–57.
9.
BoolerJ. M. P. (1980). The solution of a railway locomotive scheduling problem. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 31(10), 943–948.
10.
BoolerJ. M. P. (1995). A note on the use of Lagrangean relaxation in railway scheduling. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 46(1), 123–127.
11.
BruckerP., HurinkJ., & RolfesT. (2003). Routing of railway carriages. Journal of Global Optimization, 27(2–3), 313–332.
12.
CacchianiV., CapraraA., & TothP. (2013). A Lagrangian heuristic for a train-unit assignment problem. Discrete Applied Mathematics, 161(12), 1707–1718.
13.
CAG (2013). Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General of India on Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme (MGNREGA) for the year ended 31 March 2012 (Report No. 3 of 2013), Government of Assam. Retrieved 15June2018, from http://www.cag.gov.in/sites/default/files/audit_report_files/Assam_Report_3_2013.pdf
14.
ChungJ-.W., OhS-.M., & ChoiI-.C. (2009). A hybrid genetic algorithm for train sequencing in the Korean railway. Omega, 37(3), 555–565.
15.
CordeauJ.-F., DesaulniersG., LingayaN., SoumisF., & DesrosiersJ. (2001). Simultaneous locomotive and car assignment at VIA Rail Canada. Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, 35(8), 767–787.
16.
CordeauJ.-F., SoumisF., & DesrosiersJ. (2000). A Benders decomposition approach for the locomotive and car assignment problem. Transportation Science, 34(2), 133–149.
17.
CordeauJ.-F., TothP., & VigoD. (1998). A survey of optimization models for train routing and scheduling. Transportation Science, 32(4), 380–404.
18.
FiooleP-.J., KroonL., MarótiG., & SchrijverA. (2006). A rolling stock circulation model for combining and splitting of passenger trains. European Journal of Operational Research, 174(2), 1281–1297.
19.
FlorianM., BushellG., FerlandJ., GuerinG., & NastanskyL. (1976). The engine scheduling problem in a railway network. INFOR: Information Systems and Operational Research, 14(2), 121–138.
20.
ForbesM. A., HoltJ. N., & WattsA. M. (1991). Exact solution of locomotive scheduling problems. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 42(10), 825–831.
21.
FügenschuhA., HomfeldH., HuckA., & MartinA. (2006). Locomotive and wagon scheduling in freight transport. In OASIcs-OpenAccess Series in Informatics (Vol. 5). Retrieved 26October2018, from https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/62911838.pdf
22.
FügenschuhA., HomfeldH., HuckA., MartinA., & YuanZ. (2008). Scheduling locomotives and car transfers in freight transport. Transportation Science, 42(4), 478–491.
23.
GhoseiriK., & GhannadpourS. F. (2010). A hybrid genetic algorithm for multi-depot homogenous locomotive assignment with time windows. Applied Soft Computing, 10(1), 53–65.
24.
GodwinT., GopalanR., & NarendranT. T. (2006). Locomotive assignment and freight train scheduling using genetic algorithms. International Transactions in Operational Research, 13(4), 299–332.
25.
IllésT., MakaiM., & VaikZ. (2005). Railway engine assignment models based on combinatorial and integer programming (Operations research report 2005–04). Department of Operations, Eötvös Loránd University of Sciences, Budapest, Hungary. Retrieved 15December2015, from http://www.cs.elte.hu/opres/orr/download/ORR05_4.pdf
26.
IllésT., MakaiM., VaikZ., KroonL. G., & MöhringR. H. (2006). Combinatorial optimization model for railway engine assignment problem. In KroonL. G. & MöhringR. H. (Eds.), 5th Workshop on Algorithmic Methods and Models for Optimization of Railways. Internationales Begegnungs und Forschungszentrum für Informatik (IBFI), Zürich, Switzerland.
27.
Jie ZhangS. N., GeL., & WangY. (2013). A two-stage heuristic algorithm for locomotive scheduling. Information Technology Journal, 12(11), 2153–2159.
28.
KulshreshthaM., NagB., & KulshresthaM. (2001). A multivariate cointegrating vector auto regressive model of freight transport demand: Evidence from Indian Railways. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 35(1), 29–45.
29.
KumarN., VratP., & SushilP. (1994). A simulation study of unit exchange spares management of diesel locomotives in the Indian Railways. International Journal of Production Economics, 33(1–3), 225–236.
30.
LinZ., & KwanR. S. K. (2014). An integer fixed-charge multicommodity flow (FCMF) model for train unit scheduling. Electronic Notes in Discrete Mathematics, 41, 165–172.
31.
LingayaN., CordeauJ-.F., DesaulniersG., DesrosiersJ., & SoumisF. (2002). Operational car assignment at VIA Rail Canada. Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, 36(9), 755–778.
32.
LübbeckeM. E., & ZimmermannU. T. (2003). Engine routing and scheduling at industrial in-plant railroads. Transportation Science, 37(2), 183–197.
33.
MaruvadaD. P., & BellamkondaR. S. (2010). Analyzing the passenger service quality of the Indian Railways using Railqual: Examining the applicability of fuzzy logic. International Journal of Innovation, Management and Technology, 1(5), 478.
34.
NathanailE. (2008). Measuring the quality of service for passengers on the Hellenic Railways. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 42(1), 48–66.
35.
NobleD. H., Al-AminM., & MillsR. G. J. (2001). Production of locomotive rosters for a multi-class multi-locomotive problem. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 52(11), 1191–1200.
36.
NooriS., & GhannadpourS. F. (2012). Locomotive assignment problem with train precedence using genetic algorithm. Journal of Industrial Engineering International, 8(1), 1–13.
37.
PiuF. (2011). A mixed integer programming approach to the locomotive assignment problem. In Swiss Transport Research Conference (STRC) (pp. 1–42). Retrieved 26October2018, from http://www.strc.ch/2011/Piu.pdf
38.
PiuF., KumarV. P., BierlaireM., & SperanzaM. G. (2015). Introducing a preliminary consists selection in the locomotive assignment problem. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, 82, 217–237.
39.
PiuF., & SperanzaM. G. (2014). The locomotive assignment problem: A survey on optimization models. International Transactions in Operational Research, 21(3), 327–352.
40.
PowellW. B., & Bouzaiene-AyariB. (2007). Approximate dynamic programming for rail operations. In LiebchenC., AhujaR. K., & MesaJ. A. (Eds.), OASIcs-OpenAccess Series in Informatics (Vol. 7). Retrieved 26October2018, from http://drops.dagstuhl.de/opus/volltexte/2007/1180/pdf/07001.PowellWarren.Paper.1180.pdf
41.
PowellW. B., Bouzaiene-AyariB., LawrenceC., ChengC., DasS., & FiorilloR. (2014). Locomotive planning at Norfolk Southern: An optimizing simulator using approximate dynamic programming. Interfaces, 44(6), 567–578.
42.
PrasadM. D., & ShekharB. R. (2010). Impact of service quality management (SQM) practices on Indian Railways: A study of South Central Railways. International Journal of Business and Management, 5(9), 139.
43.
PrasanthV., & SomanK. P. (2009). Ticketing solutions for Indian Railways using RFID technology. In Proceedings of the 2009 International Conference on Advances in Computing, Control & Telecommunication Technologies, 2009 (pp. 217–219). Washington, DC: IEEE Computer Society.
44.
PucherJ., KorattyswaroopamN., & IttyerahN. (2004). The crisis of public transport in India: Overwhelming needs but limited resources. Journal of Public Transportation, 7(3), 5.
45.
RaghuramG., & BabuM. R. (1999). Alternate means of financing railways. Vikalpa, 24(1), 13–26.
46.
Indian Railways (2015a). Evolution. Retrieved 28July2016, from http://www.indianrailways.gov.in/railwayboard/view_section.jsp?lang=0&id=0,1,261
47.
Indian Railways (2015b). Statistical summary—Indian Railways. Retrieved 28July2016, from http://www.indianrailways.gov.in/railwayboard/uploads/directorate/stat_econ/2014-15/SummarySheet_Eng.pdf
48.
Indian Railways (2016, 31March. Statistical summary—Indian Railways. Retrieved 30June2017, from http://www.indianrailways.gov.in/railwayboard/uploads/directorate/stat_econ/IRSP_2015-16/SummarySheet_Eng_pdf_pdf.pdf
49.
RamaniK. V., & MandalB. K. (1992). Operational planning of passenger trains in Indian Railways. Interfaces, 22(5), 39–51.
50.
RamaniK. V., & RaghuramG. (1979). Coaching stock utilization on Indian Railways. Vikalpa, 4(4), 329–332.
51.
RouillonS., DesaulniersG., & SoumisF. (2006). An extended branch-and-bound method for locomotive assignment. Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, 40(5), 404–423.
52.
SabinoJ. A., LealJ. E., StützleT., & BirattariM. (2010). A multi- objective ant colony optimization method applied to switch engine scheduling in railroad yards. Pesquisa Operacional, 30(2), 486–514.
53.
SatoK., & FukumuraN. (2012). Real-time freight locomotive rescheduling and uncovered train detection during disruption. European Journal of Operational Research, 221(3), 636–648.
54.
TeichmannD., DordaM., GolcK., & BínováH. (2015). Locomotive assignment problem with heterogeneous vehicle fleet and hiring external locomotives. Mathematical Problems in Engineering. Retrieved 26October2018, from http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2015/583909
55.
VaidyanathanB., AhujaR. K., LiuJ., & ShughartL. A. (2008). Real-life locomotive planning: New formulations and computational results. Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, 42(2), 147–168.
56.
VaidyanathanB., AhujaR. K., & OrlinJ. B. (2008). The locomotive routing problem. Transportation Science, 42(4), 492–507.
57.
WrightM. B. (1989). Applying stochastic algorithms to a locomotive scheduling problem. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 40(2), 187–192.
58.
YuM-.M. (2008). Assessing the technical efficiency, service effectiveness, and technical effectiveness of the world’s railways through NDEA analysis. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 42(10), 1283–1294.
ZiaratiK., SoumisF., DesrosiersJ., GélinasS., & SaintongeA. (1997). Locomotive assignment with heterogeneous consists at CN North America. European Journal of Operational Research, 97(2), 281–292.
61.
ZiaratiK., SoumisF., DesrosiersJ., & SolomonM. M. (1999). A branch-first, cut-second approach for locomotive assignment. Management Science, 45(8), 1156–1168.
