|Table of Contents|

Evaluation methods comparison of quantitative transportation network efficiency(PDF)


Research Field:
Publishing date:


Evaluation methods comparison of quantitative transportation network efficiency
QIN Jin1 HE Yu-xin12
1. School of Traffic and Transportation Engineering, Central South University, Changsha 410075, Hunan, China; 2. College of Science and Engineering, City University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong 999077, China
transportation planning transportation network efficiency quantitative evaluation method network structure traffic demand influence rule
The existing evaluation methods of quantitative traffic network efficiency were compared. Network structure, traffic demand, travel choice, travel cost and other factors were considered, and the evaluation result rationalities of three methods were studied from the following three aspects, namely the analytic calculation, influence rule of traffic demand on network efficiency under fixed network structure, and influence rule of network structure on network efficiency under fixed traffic demand. The pros, cons and applications of different methods were summarized. Comparative result shows that the calcuation method of weighted network operation efficiency(method 1)does not consider the congestion effect of transportation network, and the calculated network efficiency is a monotone function of traffic demand, so it cannot be used in traffic congested network. The calcuation method of transportation congested network efficiency(method 2)is suitable for the efficiency evaluation of congested network, but for the premise of constant demand, the efficiency is a monotonous increasing function of connected path numbers between OD, and cannot reflect the influence rule of network structure on traffic network efficiency. The calcuation method of transportation network efficiency(method 3)can give a true reflection of comprehensive influence effect of network structure, traffic demand, travel cost and travel choice on network efficiency. In addition, the network efficiency calculated by method 3 and the Braess paradox can explain with each other, which indicates that method 3 have a relatively better rationality on the real operation performance. In the fixed structure of traffic network, there always exists a traffic demand to ensure the maximal network efficiency calculated by method 3. In the fixed demand of traffic network, there always exists a network structure to ensure the maximal network efficiency calculated by method 3. 3 tabs, 6 figs, 28 refs.


[1] COSTA A, MARKELLOS R N. Evaluating public transport efficiency with neural network models[J]. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, 1997, 5(5): 301-312.
[2] 吴文化.中国交通运输效率评价体系研究分析[J].综合运输,2001(3):32-35.
WU Wen-hua. Research and analysis on the evaluation system of transportation efficiency in China[J]. Comprehensive Transportation, 2001(3): 32-35.(in Chinese)
[3] LEVINSON D.Perspectives on efficiency in transportation[J]. International Journal of Transport Management, 2003, 1(3): 145-155.
[4] 俞礼军,靳文舟.交通效率的度量方法研究[J].公路,2006(10):102-106.
YU Li-jun, JIN Wen-zhou. A study on measures of transportation efficiency[J]. Highway, 2006(10): 102-106.(in Chinese)
[5] 叶彭姚,陈小鸿.基于交通效率的城市最佳路网密度研究[J].中国公路学报,2008,21(4):94-98.
YE Peng-yao, CHEN Xiao-hong. Study of urban optimal density of road network based on transportation efficiency[J]. China Journal of Highway and Transport, 2008, 21(4): 94-98.(in Chinese)
[6] NAIT S M A, MANIER M A, MOUDNI A E. Spectral analysis for performance evaluation in a bus network[J]. European Journal of Operational Research, 2009, 193(1): 289-302.
[7] GUDMUNDSSON S. Efficiency and performance measurement in the air transportation industry[J]. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, 2004, 40(6): 439-442.
[8] YU Ming-Miin, LIN E T J. Efficiency and effectiveness in railway performance using a multi-activity network DEA model[J]. Omega, 2008, 36(6): 1005-1017.
[9] ROUGHGARDEN T, TARDOS É. How bad is selfish routings[J]. Journal of the ACM, 2002, 49(2): 236-259.
[10] 黄海军,欧阳恋群,刘天亮.交通网络中用户均衡行为的效率损失上界[J].北京航空航天大学学报,2006,32(10):1215-1219.
HUANG Hai-jun, OUYANG Lian-qun, LIU Tian-liang. Upper bounds of efficiency loss for user equilibrium behavior in traffic networks[J]. Journal of Beijing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics, 2006, 32(10): 1215-1219.(in Chinese)
[11] 余孝军,黄海军.交通网络效率的度量和元件重要性的计算方法[J].系统工程理论与实践,2012,32(7):1546-1552.
YU Xiao-jun, HUANG Hai-jun. Measuring the network efficiency and computing the component importance[J]. Systems Engineering—Theory and Practice, 2012, 32(7): 1546-1552.(in Chinese)
[12] 余孝军,黄海军,刘天亮.固定需求网络中多用户类随机均衡的效率损失[J].交通运输系统工程与信息,2009,9(4):83-89.
YU Xiao-jun, HUANG Hai-jun, LIU Tian-liang. Efficiency loss of the multi-class stochastic traffic equilibrium assignment with fixed demand[J]. Journal of Transportation Systems Engineering and Information Technology, 2009, 9(4): 83-89.(in Chinese)
[13] 余孝军,黄海军.收费情形下多用户类随机用户均衡交通分配的效率损失上界[J].吉林大学学报:工学版,2009,39(增2):71-75.
YU Xiao-jun, HUANG Hai-jun. Bounding efficiency loss of multiclass stochastic user equilibrium traffic assignment under road pricing[J]. Journal of Jilin University: Engineering and Technology Edition, 2009, 39(S2): 71-75.(in Chinese)
[14] 刘天亮,欧阳恋群,黄海军.ATIS作用下的混合交通行为网络与效率损失上界[J].系统工程理论与实践,2007,27(4):154-159.
LIU Tian-liang, OUYANG Lian-qun, HUANG Hai-jun. Mixed travel behavior in networks with ATIS and upper bound of efficiency loss[J]. Systems Engineering—Theory and Practice, 2007,27(4): 154-159.(in Chinese)
[15] GUO Xiao-lei, YANG Hai, LIU Tian-liang. Bounding the
inefficiency of logit-based stochastic user equilibrium[J]. European Journal of Operational Research, 2010, 201(2): 463-469.
[16] 石超峰,徐寅峰.交通网络效率损失上界的估计方法[J].系统工程理论与实践,2010,30(5):945-947.
SHI Chao-feng, XU Yin-feng. Estimation methods for upper bounds of efficiency loss in traffic networks[J]. Systems Engineering—Theory and Practice, 2010, 30(5): 945-947.(in Chinese)
[17] LATORA V, MARCHIORI M. Efficient behavior of small-world networks[J]. Physical Review Letters, 2001, 87(19): 198701-1-4.
[18] LATORA V, MARCHIORI M. Economic small-world behavior in weighted networks[J]. European Physical Journal B, 2003, 32(2): 249-263.
[19] LATORA V, MARCHIORI M. Is the Boston subway a small-world networks?[J]. Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, 2002, 314(1-4): 109-113.
[20] LATORA V, MARCHIORI M. How the science of complex networks can help developing strategies against terrorism[J]. Chaos, Solitons and Fractals, 2004, 20(1): 69-75.
[21] CRUCITTI P, LATORA V, MARCHIORI M, et al. Efficiency of scale-free networks: error and attack tolerance[J]. Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, 2003, 320: 622-642.
[22] CRUCITTI P, LATORA V, MARCHIORI M, et al. Error and attack tolerance of complex networks[J]. Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, 2004, 340(1-3): 388-394.
[23] NAGURNEY A, QIANG Qiang. A network efficiency measure for congested networks[J]. EPL, 2007, 79(3): 1-5.
[24] NAGURNEY A, QIANG Qiang. A network efficiency measure with application to critical infrastructure networks[J]. Journal of Global Optimization, 2008, 40(1-3): 261-275.
[25] QIANG Qiang, NAGURNEY A. A unified network performance measure with importance identification and the ranking of network components[J]. Optimization Letters, 2008, 2(1): 127-142.
[26] QIN Jin, HE Yu-xin, NI Ling-lin. Quantitative efficiency evaluation method for transportation networks[J]. Sustainability, 2014(6): 8364-8378.
[27] QIN Jin, NI Ling-lin, SHI Feng. Mixed transportation network design under a sustainable development perspective[J]. The Scientific World Journal, 2013, 2013: 1-8.
[28] CHEN A, LEE D H, JAYAKRISHNAN R. Computational study of state-of-the-art path-based traffic assignment algorithms[J]. Mathematics and Computers in Simulation, 2002, 59(6): 509-518.


Last Update: 2018-05-20