TRANSIT ASSIGNMENT WITH VARIABLE

FREQUENCIES AND CONGESTION EFFECTS

G. Bellei, G. Gentile and N. Papola
Università degli Studi di Roma “La Sapienza”

1 INTRODUCTION

Previous works on transit assignment focused on addressing transit network loading with
implicit enumeration of the travel alternatives, where users waiting at the line stops are
assumed to make adaptive choices, depending on given line frequencies and other information
concerning the forthcoming vehicles.
Basically, two approaches have been adopted to model transport supply in order to allow
adaptive choices representation. The first, introduced by Chriqui and Robillard (1975) is
based on the concept of route section and requires a substantial augmentation of the basic
transit network. The second, introduced by Nguyen and Pallottino (1988), is based on the
concept of oriented hyper-graph , a generalization of the oriented graph, which allows an
elegant representation of the transit network; in the same work equilibrium formulation is also
introduced. A third well known network loading model, proposed by Spiess and Florian
(1989) and based on the concept of strategy, supplies the same flows as the second approach.
Later De Cea and Fernandez (1993) and Wu, Florian and Marcotte (1994) adopted these
different approaches to further discuss transit assignment formulation as an equilibrium
problem, but the congestion is only partially represented, since either queueing at stops or
running times dependence on flows on board is assumed. Nguyen, Pallottino and Gendreau
(1998) developed a logit type network loading which is adopted here.
In Bellei Gentile and Papola (2000a) a multi-user and multimodal version of the equilibrium
problem with elastic demand up to trip generation and non-separable arc cost functions, has
been formulated as fixed point problem, where, on the supply side, the transportation network
is modelled through an oriented hyper-graph. In Bellei Gentile and Papola (2000b) transit
assignment has been addressed as a specification of this equilibrium model within the
formulation of a network design problem where frequencies and tolls are the design variables.
This new formulation of transit assignment permits to freely model the congestion both on
road and on transit network, yet it does not allow to represent its effects on line frequencies,
which are assumed constant.
The aim of this work is to take explicitly into account the dependence of line frequencies on
vehicle cycle times into the supply model underlying transit assignment, assuming as given
the number of vehicles operating each line. Moreover we investigate on the main congestion
phenomena affecting frequencies and, more in general, transit performances, that is the
interaction between the private cars and the transit lines vehicles using the same road link and
the various effects of line capacity, in a multimodal equilibrium framework.
The transit equilibrium models proposed, then, always represents the dependence of vehicle
cycle times and frequencies on road congestion.
Vehicle cycle time depend also on stopping time, in its turn depending on boarding, alighting
and on board flows. Two formulations of the transit assignment are presented, one assuming
stopping time as constant, the other developing a simple stopping time model. If the constant
stopping time assumption is accepted, then the resulting equilibrium can be formalized as a
fixed point problem where the arc equivalent flows are the current variables, else, also the line
frequencies have to be considered as the current variables.
The existence of a solution is assured by the continuity of the functions involved in the
definition of the problems formalized. Its uniqueness is instead a much more delicate question
and, actually, it may be misleading to force the problem formulation in order to achieve it.
In fact, with reference to elementary cases, it can be easily shown that the impact of road
congestion on transit performances alone may lead to multiple solutions. This should not be
taken as a modelling flaw, since the experience of diverging evolutions of similar transit
systems with the growth of private car use supports such a model feature.
Finally, a solution algorithm based on the MSA (Method of Successive Averages) is proposed
for each one of the two equilibrium model formulations presented.
With reference to a real network we present some numerical applications of the proposed
methods, implementing different versions of the transit supply model in order to evaluate the
relevance of the variable frequencies issue and the relative weight of the congestion
phenomena considered.

2 THE DEMAND MODEL

Making specific reference to persons’ trips, on the demand side, we employ behavioural
models with elastic demand based on random utility theory. Specifically, the choice model is
assumed probabilistic, additive, strictly positive and differentiable (Cantarella, 1997).
The users are grouped into homogeneous classes. The generic class u∈U , where U is the set
of the classes considered, is a collection of N u > 0 users identical to each other with respect to
any individual characteristic influencing the equilibrium. In particular, they share the same
choice set J u, made up of a positive finite number of travel alternatives.
The generic travel alternative is associated to a path connecting the origin of the trip to its
destination through a specified sequence of links, or to an hyperpath when the trip involves
adaptive choices (e.g. on the transit mode). By choosing opportunely the form of the joint
probability density function of the random residuals, the correlations between the travel
alternatives can be specified so as to provide a hierarchic level structure to the choice model.
In that case, a travel alternative is a path on a user choice tree (Ben Akiva, Lerman, 1985)
specifying the choice at each level: trip generation, distribution, modal split and assignment.
Then, the choice model considered may support any current elastic travel demand model.
The demand model is formally expressed as:
F = F(C ) , (1)
where F and C are, respectively, the travel alternative flows and generalized costs vectors. For
the choice model considered the map F(C ) is C2 monotonic function ranging in a compact,
convex and not empty set.

3 THE SUPPLY MODEL

On the supply side, the multimodal network of infrastructures and services is modelled
through an oriented hypergraph G = (N, A), where N is the nodes set and A the arcs set,
characterized by non-separable class specific arc cost functions. This model lets to represent
the relations between the variables associated to the arcs of the network and the variables
associated to the travel alternatives of the users’ choice sets in additive form, also in the case
of adaptive choices.
The generic arc a∈A is identified by its tail TL(a)∈N and by its head HD(a)⊆N, all hyper-arcs
at a transit stop may be derived by a support hyper-arc. An hyper-path of G ,with origin o∈N
and destination d∈N , is a minimal and acyclic hypergraph j = (N(j), A(j)) such that A(j)⊆A ,
N(j) = {o} + [∪a∈A(j) HD(a)] and each i∈N(j) is connected to d on j. The reader is referred for
details to Nguyen, Pallottino and Gendreau (1998). The supply network model, whose transit
elements are synthetically described in the following figure, is based on a specific
classification of the arc set, for which the following relations hold:
A = AR +AT ; AR = ACR + AS; AT = ACT +AP +AF +AH + AB +AL +AA , (2)
where: stop node
a∈ AL
AR is the road network arcs set, line 1
ACR is the road network connectors arcs set, line 2
a ∈ AB

AS is the road arcs set, line 3

boarding
AT is the transit network arcs set,
node
ACT is the transit network connectors arcs set,
hyper-arc

AP is the walking arcs set,

support
a ∈ AA

AF is the transit stop access arcs set,

AH is the waiting hyper-arcs set, waiting
node
AB is the boarding arcs set,
a ∈ AF

AL is the line running arcs set,

AA is the alighting arcs set. a ∈ AP
walking node

Let cau and fau be the cost and the flow relative to the generic arc a∈A and class u∈U. It is:
Cju = Σa∈A cau⋅πaju j = 1, … , |J u| , u = 1, … , |U| ; in compact form C = Π T⋅c , (3)
fau = Σj∈Ju Fju⋅πaju a = 1, … , |A| , u = 1, … , |U| ; in compact form f = Π ⋅F , (4)
where πaju is the probability that the arc a is utilized by the users belonging to the class u as an
element of the hyperpath associated with the travel alternative j .
From the (4) using the (1) and the (3) we get the network loading map:
f(c) = Π ⋅F(Π T⋅c) , (5)
which shares analogous properties with the demand function (Bellei, Gentile and Papola,
2000a).
As in Daganzo (1983), the congestion phenomena are represented as a function of the arc
equivalent flows, defined as follows:
va = ∑ u∈U fau a∈AT ; va = ∑ u∈U ϑ u ⋅fau + ∑ l∈L(a) ϑ l ⋅φ l ⋅(1 -PFl ) a∈AR;
in compact form v = v( f , φ) , (6)
where φ is the line frequencies vector, ϑ is the equivalent weight on road congestion of the
u

vehicle used by class u∈U divided by its occupancy coefficient, ϑ l is the equivalent weight
on road congestion of a vehicle of line l∈L (lines set), L(a) is the set of lines running on arc
a∈A and PFl∈[0, 1] expresses the level of segregation from road traffic of line l∈L .
By definition, the line frequency of the generic line l∈L is the ratio of the number of vehicles
NVl operating the line and the vehicle cycle time, given by the sum of the travel times sa of the
arcs belonging to the set AL(l) of the running arcs of line l plus its terminal time TTl:
φ l = NVl / (∑ a∈AL(l) sa +TT l ) l∈L . In compact form we have: φ = φ(s L) , (7)
L
where s is the vector of the travel times of the line running arcs, which we define as the sum
of the line running times and of the line stopping times:
sa = la / VOL(a) +STa a∈AL , (8)
where la and STa are, respectively, the length and the line stopping times of arc a∈AL and VOl
is the operating speed, including times lost for accelerations and decelerations, but excluding
stopping times, of line l∈L.
The dependence of the line running arcs travel times on road congestion is modelled by
summing up to the (8) the following term:
(1 -PFL(a)) ⋅(∑ b∈APR(a) sb -lb /Vb ) a∈AL , (9)
where APR(a) is the set of the road arcs corresponding the arc a∈AL, while sb , lb and Vb are,
respectively, the actual travel time, the length and the free flow speed of the road arc b∈AS .
Assuming that the road travel times of private vehicles do not depend on the line frequencies
directly but only through the equivalent flows, if the line stopping times are assumed constant
and given, then we have in compact form:
s L = s L(v) . (10)
If, instead, the line stopping times are modelled as follows:
STa = [(vAB(a) /φ L(a))/BK L(a) +(vAA(a) /φ L(a))/AK L(a)]⋅[1+α BL(a)⋅(va /(φ L(a)⋅KVL(a)))β L(a)] a∈AL , (11)
B

where AB(a) and AA(a) are, respectively, the boarding arc entering TL(a) and the alighting arc
exiting HD(a), with a∈AL; KVl, BK l and AK l are, respectively, the vehicle, boarding and
alighting capacity with reference to line l∈L, while α Bl and β Bl are the parameters of the BPR
type coefficient expressing the congestion, then we have in compact form:
s L = s L(v, φ) . (12)
The arc costs are assumed depend on v and φ through the following function:
cau = η u⋅sa(v, φ)⋅ma(v, φ) a = 1, … , |A| , u = 1, … , |U| ; in compact form c = c(v , φ) , (13)
where η u denotes the time unit monetary value for class u , while sa(v, φ) and ma(v, φ),
assumed continuous, express, respectively, the travel time and the comfort coefficient of arc
a∈A , for which we assume.
ma = (a∈AL) ⋅[1 +α CL(a) ⋅[va / (φ L(a) ⋅KV L(a))] β
C
L(a)
+(a∈A-AL) a∈A , (14)
whereα l and β l are the parameters of the BPR type coefficient expressing the congestion
C C

due to the density of the passengers within the vehicle, affecting the travel comfort.
In order to model the waiting times at the line stops, as in De Cea and Fernandez (1993) we
introduce the concept of effective frequency , here defined as a function of v and φ through
the following relations:
ω b = φ l(b) ⋅(0.5 / α l(b)) / [1+α Wl(b)⋅(vAF(b) / (φ l(b) ⋅KV l(b))) β ] b∈AB ,
W
l(b)
(15)
where α l expresses the headway irregularity of line l∈L and AF(b) is the line running arc
exiting HD(b), while α Wl and β Wl are the parameters of the BPR type coefficient expressing
the congestion due to the queuing phenomenon at the line stops. On this bases we define the
cumulated effective frequency and the internal coefficients of the generic arc a∈AH as
follows:
Ω a = ∑ b∈FHD(a) ω b a∈AH , (16)
xab = ω b / Ω a a∈ AH, b∈FHD (a) ; xab = 1 a∈A-AH, b ≡ FHD (a) (17)
where FHD(a) is the set of the arcs exiting the nodes belonging to HD(a) .
With reference to the travel times of the hyper-arcs, we then assume:
sa = 0.5 / Ωa a∈AH . (18)
The components of the generic column of matrix Π , containing the probabilities that each arc
a∈A is utilized by the users belonging to the class u∈U as an element of the hyper-path
associated with the travel alternative j∈J u , are defined by the following recursive relations:
πaju = ∑ b∈BSE(a) πbju ⋅xba a = 1, … , |A| , (19)
where BSE(a) is the set of the efficient arcs whose head contains the tail of arc a∈A . Using
the (15), the (16) and the (17), the solution of the systems (19)-s can be expressed in compact
form as:
Π = Π(φ) . (20)
It is worth noting that, using a network loading algorithm such that described in Nguyen,
Pallottino and Gendreau (1998), the arc equivalent flows are actually calculated operating
directly on the arc travel times and the frequencies, making use of the internal coefficients,
thus avoiding the explicit enumeration of the hyper-path.
4 THE EQUILIBRIUM MODELS

The equilibrium flow and cost pattern is determined by solving a fixed point problems. Two
cases can be considered.
The vehicle cycle times depend on the line arcs travel times, which we define as the sum of
the line running and stopping times. The line running times are affected by the interaction
between the private cars and the transit lines vehicles using the same road link. This
congestion phenomenon do not depend on the line frequencies directly, but only through the
arc equivalent total flows. In fact, using the (5), the (20), the (13), the (6) becomes:
v = v(Π(φ) ⋅F(Π(φ) T⋅c(v , φ)), φ). (21)
while, using the (10) or the (12), the (7) becomes respectively:
φ = φ(s L(v)) , (22)
φ = φ(s L(v, φ)) , (23)
Combining the (21) with the (22) we have:
v = v(Π(φ(s L(v))) ⋅F(Π(φ(s L(v))) T⋅c(v , φ(s L(v)))), φ(s L(v))) . (24)
Then, assuming the stopping times to be constant, the vehicle cycle times do not depend on
the line frequencies directly and the transit assignment can be formalized as a fixed point
problem where the arc equivalent total flows vector v is considered as current variable.
On the contrary, in order to consider the times at the line stops to be dependent on the number
of users boarding and alighting the vehicle, the transit assignment has to be formalized as a
fixed point problem where the line frequencies vector φ is considered, jointly with the arc
equivalent total flows vector v , as current variable. In this case, in fact, the (21) and the (23)
must be taken separately, yielding
[v , φ] = [v(Π(φ) ⋅F(Π(φ) T⋅c(v , φ)), φ) , φ(s L(v, φ))] (25)
With reference to the case of fixed given line frequencies – that is dropping equation (7) from
the transit assignment formulation – on the basis of the demand and supply model here
considered, it is well known that at least one UE pattern exists and that, if the arc cost
function is monotone non-decreasing, then, the UE pattern is unique.
Here, the existence of a solution is still assured by the continuity of the functions defining
problems (24) and (21).
In general, the uniqueness cannot be assured by means of the standard sufficient conditions
working on general properties of the function involved. Indeed there are cases where there is
more than one solution. This is due more on the transit congestion phenomenon represented
than to the effect of the frequency elasticity, which is actually moderate, usually. In order to
assure the uniqueness, a paramether analisis should be then made.
The fixed point problems (24) and (25)can be solved through a standard MSA algorithm. With
reference to problem (24), within the generic iteration we determine, first the line arcs travel
times, then the line frequencies, through the cycle times, and finally the arc generalized travel
times, operating on which we load the network. Clearly, with reference to problem (25), the
averaging process must involve both vectors v and φ .
REFERENCES

Bellei G. , Gentile G. , Papola N. (2000a) Network Pricing Optimization in Multi-user and

Multimodal Context with Elastic Demand. Submitted to Transpn. Res.

Bellei G. , Gentile G. , Papola N. (2000b) Tolls and Transit Frequencies Optimization.

Presented at the Second ICTTS , Beijing, China.

Ben Akiva M. Lerman S. (1985) Discrete choice Analysis MIT Press, Cambridge Mass.

Cantarella G. E. (1997) A General Fixed-Point Approach to Multimode Multi-User

Equilibrium Assignment with Elastic Demand. Transpn. Sci. 31, 107-128.

Chriqui C. , Robillard P. (1975) Common Bus Line. Transpn. Sci. 9, 115-121.

Daganzo C. F. (1983) Stochastic Network Equilibrium with MultipleVehicle Types and

Asymmetric, Indefinite Link Cost Jacobians. Transpn. Sci. 17, 282-300.

De Cea J. , Fernandez E. (1993) Transit Assignment for Congested Public Transport Systems:
An Equilibrium Model. Transpn. Sci. 27, 133-147.

Nguyen S. , Pallottino S. (1988) Equilibrium Traffic Assignment for Large Scale Transit
Networks. Eur. J. Operational Res. 37, 176-186.

Nguyen S. , Pallottino S. , Gendreau M. (1998) Implicit Enumeration of Hyperpaths in a Logit

Model for Transit Networks. Transpn. Sci. 32, 54-64.

Spiess H. , Florian M. (1989) Optimal Strategies : a New Model for Transit Networks.
Transpn. Res. 23B, 83-102.

Wu J. H. , Florian M. , Marcotte P. (1994) Transit Equilibrium Assignment : a Model and

Solution Algorithms. Transpn. Sci. 28, 193-203.