Abstract:Both evaluating the service quality of a public transport system and understanding how passengers choose between modes or routes is imperative for public transport operators, providers of competing mobility services and policy makers. However, the literature does not offer consensus on how either of these tasks should be performed, which can lead to inconsistent or counter-intuitive results. This paper provides a formal treatment on how common manifestations of public transport (route sets, timetables and line plans) can be evaluated consistently, and how passengers distribute over routes. Our main insight is that evaluation and routing are two sides of the same coin: by solving an appropriate optimization model one obtains both the quality of the route set, timetable or line plan (the optimal objective value), and the distribution of the travelers over the routes (the optimal solution itself). We further demonstrate that the framework developed in this paper enables planners to (i) improve service by taking better decisions and (ii) assess to what degree of accuracy traveler behavior should be modeled on their network, potentially avoiding investing in complicated methods that may not be necessary.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?
The problems that this paper attempts to solve mainly focus on the service quality assessment of public transportation systems and passenger route selection. Specifically:
1. **Inconsistency between service quality and passenger choice models**: Currently, there is no consensus in the literature on how to assess the service quality of public transportation systems and how to model passengers' choices between different modes or routes. This inconsistency may lead to inconsistent or counter - intuitive results. For example, in some cases, increasing the travel time of a route may be considered to improve the service quality instead, because it prompts passengers to switch to other faster routes. However, this phenomenon is not always reasonable and may lead public transportation planners to make wrong decisions, such as reducing or canceling routes, which may actually damage the service quality.
2. **Lack of a unified evaluation and routing framework**: To overcome the above problems, the paper proposes a formal treatment method, aiming to provide a unified framework for evaluating common manifestations in public transportation systems (such as route sets, timetables, and line plans), while determining how passengers are distributed among different routes. The author believes that evaluation and routing are two aspects of the same problem, and by solving the appropriate optimization model, the quality of the route set, timetable, or line plan (i.e., the optimal objective value) and the distribution of passengers on different routes (i.e., the optimal solution itself) can be obtained simultaneously.
3. **Guiding significance for practitioners**: In addition, the paper also shows that the developed framework can help planners improve services, improve service quality through better decision - making, and evaluate the degree of accuracy required for modeling passenger behavior in their networks, thereby avoiding unnecessary investment in complex methods. For example, the paper points out that in long - term or strategic planning (such as line planning), the shortest - path model may be accurate enough to make good decisions without over - relying on complex models such as the Logit model.
In summary, the main contribution of the paper lies in providing a new evaluation function that is consistent with the Logit model, and proposing routing models and metrics for line plans with specific properties. Through this framework, planners can not only improve services but also evaluate the differences between different models, thereby avoiding unnecessary investment in complex methods.