4.7 Article

Connecting e-hailing to mass transit platform: Analysis of relative spatial position

Journal

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.trc.2017.02.013

Keywords

E-hailing service; Fixed-route service; Relative spatial position; Continuous approximation; Discrete-event simulation

Funding

  1. National Science Foundation [CMMI-1402911]
  2. Div Of Civil, Mechanical, & Manufact Inn
  3. Directorate For Engineering [1402911] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This paper analyzes and compares two different relative spatial position (RSP) designs in an integrated e-hailingifixed-route transit system: a zone-based design that operates e-hailing vehicles within a zone, and a line-based design that operates e-hailing vehicles along a fixed-route transit line and with a stable headway. To conduct a meaningful comparison, the optimal design problems for both systems are formulated using a same analytical framework based on the continuous approximation approach. A comprehensive numerical experiment is performed to compare various cost components corresponding to the optimal designs, and a discrete-event simulation model is developed to validate the analysis. The analytical and simulation results agree with each other well, with a discrepancy in the total system cost less than 5% in most test scenarios. These results also suggest that the line-based system consistently outperforms the zone-based system in terms of both agency and user costs, for all scenarios tested. Compared to the zone-based design, the line-based design features a sparser fixed-route network (resulting in larger stop spacing) but a higher dispatching frequency. It is concluded that the higher efficiency of the line-based design is likely derived from the strategy of operating e-hailing vehicles with a more regular route/headway structure and allowing ride-sharing. (C) 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available