Modeling and managing ridesharing in a multi-modal network with an aggregate traffic representation: A doubly dynamical approach

Decentralised game‐theoretic management for a community‐based transportation system

“…Fig. 8 shows that the normalised average trip price when using DGT is lower in comparison with the model is presented in [1]. The normalised average trip price in both models is not much different from 9:00 until noon.…”

“…From comparing the Figs. 7 and 8, we can conclude that the journey normalised average price when the passenger takes the bus only in the DGT model is almost the same as the price when using the multi‐transportation mode model in [1].…”

“…As we mentioned previously, the DGT is multi‐mode transportation to optimise the trip time and fare for the whole trip. In this subsection, we compare the DGT with the proposed model in [1], which optimised the trip cost only without considering the trip time. This study developed a multi‐model to solve the problem of dynamic ridesharing within different days.…”

“…However, in the afternoon, the normalised average trip in DGT drops and reaches 45 at 18:00. This decrease is not big for the scheme in [1]. In Table 10, the normalised average trip price‐savings rate between using the DGT and using the model in [1] is 5 at the beginning of the day and 25 at the end of the day.…”

“…This scheme, which involves multi‐transportation forms, allows the user to be an active prosumer where he can travel throughout the city using public and private forms of transportation, make decisions about trip cost, and provide a transportation service when he agrees to share available seats in his car with neighbours. Also, the decentralised game‐theoretic transportation (DGT) is compared with the model in [1] which is called multi‐modal doubly dynamical approach to prove that the trip cost using DGT is lower than using the model in [1].…”