2012
DOI: 10.11128/sne.22.tn.10123
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Simulation and Optimization of Cologne's Tram Schedule

Abstract: In many tram networks multiple lines share tracks and stations, thus requiring robust schedules which prevent inevitable delays from spreading through the network. Feasible schedules also have to fulfill various planning requirements originating from political and economical reasons.In this paper we present a tool set designed to generate schedules optimized for robustness, which also satisfy given sets of planning requirements. These tools allow us to compare time tables with respect to their applicability an… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
20
0

Year Published

2014
2014
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
4
1

Relationship

4
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 9 publications
(20 citation statements)
references
References 12 publications
(9 reference statements)
0
20
0
Order By: Relevance
“…For an in-depth description of the optimization method, see [21]. A more detailed discussion of the simulation software can be found in [7].…”
Section: Simulation and Optimization Of Tram Schedulesmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…For an in-depth description of the optimization method, see [21]. A more detailed discussion of the simulation software can be found in [7].…”
Section: Simulation and Optimization Of Tram Schedulesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…[1,3,4,5,9,10,12]). Most of them aim at one general objective like minimizing 1 This section is an abbreviated version of [21], section 1.…”
Section: Optimization Of Tram Schedulesmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The resulting software tools were applied to the KVB network of Cologne, Germany (see [23]), and the TAM Tramway network of Montpellier, France (see [25] The simulation engine was run on up to eight processors of the described type, under the parameter set described in section 5.1. Average runtime, speedup and marginal utility are shown in table 3 and figure 9.…”
Section: 2mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…robustness against disturbances (see Cacchiani et al 2012), synchronicity of departures to accommodate transfer connections (see Ceder et al 2001;Eanki 2004;Ibarra-Rojas and Rios-Solis 2012), or the minimization of passenger waiting time (see Saharidis et al 2014;Wu et al 2015). Another common objective is regularity as a measure of the resilience of a timetable against small inevitable disturbances (see Genç 2003; Bampas et al 2006;Ullrich et al 2012).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 98%