A Reliability-Based Traf Fic Assignment Model For Multi-Modal Transport Network Under Demand Uncertainty

JOURNAL OF ADVANCED TRANSPORTATION
J. Adv. Transp. 2014; 48:66–85

Published online 13 March 2012 in Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com). DOI: 10.1002/atr.202
A reliability-based traffic assignment model for multi-modal

transport network under demand uncertainty
Xiao Fu*, William H. K. Lam and Bi Yu Chen

Department of Civil and Structural Engineering, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hung Hom, Kowloon, Hong Kong
SUMMARY
In densely populated and congested urban areas, the travel times in congested multi-modal transport net-
works are generally varied and stochastic in practice. These stochastic travel times may be raised from
day-to-day demand fluctuations and would affect travelers’ route and mode choice behaviors according to
their different expectations of on-time arrival. In view of these, this paper presents a reliability-based user
equilibrium traffic assignment model for congested multi-modal transport networks under demand uncer-
tainty. The stochastic bus frequency due to the unstable travel time of bus route is explicitly considered.
By the proposed model, travelers’ route and mode choice behaviors are intensively explored. In addition,
a stochastic state-augmented multi-modal transport network is adopted in this paper to effectively model
probable transfers and non-linear fare structures. A numerical example is given to illustrate the merits of
the proposed model. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
KEY WORDS: multi-modal transport network; travel time reliability; demand uncertainty; traffic assignment
model; route and mode choice behaviors
1. INTRODUCTION
In metropolitan areas, travel times in multi-modal transport networks are generally varied from day to
day because of random demand fluctuations and supply degradations. Many empirical studies have
found that travel time uncertainty has significant impacts on travelers’ route and mode choice
behaviors [1–4]. These empirical studies revealed that travelers indeed consider the travel time
uncertainty as a risk for their travels. To reduce the risk of late arrival, travelers may have more
concerns on the probability that a trip can be successfully fulfilled within a given travel time, referred
as travel time reliability in the literature. Therefore, travelers’ concerns on travel time reliability should
be explicitly considered in the travel behavior modeling.
In view of this, Lo et al. [5] extended the well-known user equilibrium (UE) model [6] to reliability-
based user equilibrium (RUE) model by using a concept of travel time budget. The travel time budget
is the summation of mean route travel time and a safety margin. The safety margin is an extra time
added by a traveler to achieve his or her desired probability of on-time arrival. Under RUE status,
travelers choose the optimal route with minimum travel time budget instead of expected travel time
in the UE model.
Following this RUE framework, many researchers have been focusing their attentions to travel
behavior modeling in either road or transit networks. In road networks, Shao et al. [7] proposed a
RUE model to investigate the effects of demand uncertainty. Siu and Lo [8] developed a RUE model
considering both demand and supply uncertainties. Zhou and Chen [9] compared three RUE models
under demand uncertainty. Reliability-based stochastic user equilibrium (RSUE) models were further
developed to take account of travelers’ perception errors [10,11].
*Correspondence to: Xiao Fu, Department of Civil and Structural Engineering, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University,
Hung Hom, Kowloon, Hong Kong. E-mail: xiao.fu@polyu.edu.hk
Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

RELIABILITY-BASED MULTI-MODAL ASSIGNMENT MODEL 67
In transit networks, Yang and Lam [12] presented a RSUE model in the congested network with
unreliable transit services. Zhang et al. [13] developed a schedule-based RSUE model to investigate
travel choice behaviors, in terms of departure time and route choices, in transit networks with demand
and supply uncertainties.
However, little effort has been found in modeling travelers’ choice behaviors in multi-modal trans-
port networks under uncertainties. In reality, there is a practical need for providing a reliability-based
traffic assignment model in the multi-modal networks. There are two main reasons. First, public transit
networks and road networks interact with each other, especially during rush hours. A regular frequency
of bus service may be disrupted by traffic congestion that occurs in road networks. Using either transit
or road networks in modeling cannot demonstrate the interactions between public transit and road traffic.
Thus, a multi-modal network model is practically required. Second, combine-mode trips have increased
in magnitude in recent years. Travelers may fulfill trips by autos, or by public transit, or by park and ride
for their daily travels. Therefore, exploring travelers’ route and mode choice behaviors in multi-modal
networks considering travel time reliability has become an important issue.
In view of these, this paper presents a RUE model in multi-modal networks. To capture the effects of
demand uncertainty, we formulated passenger flows and generalized travel times of different transport
modes as random variables. Stochastic bus frequency derived from the variability of road travel time is
explicitly considered, and the derivations of mean and standard deviation (SD) of link and route travel
times are provided. Additionally, unrealistic transfers are avoided, and the difficulty of non-linear fare
structures is tackled by using a state-augmented multi-modal (SAM) network developed by Lo et al. [14].
The outline of this paper is as follows. The model assumptions and the network representation are
described in Section 2. The distributions of passenger flow and travel time are derived in Section 3.
The RUE model formulation and the solution algorithm are presented in Section 4. A numerical
example illustrating the proposed model is provided in Section 5. Finally, conclusions and recommen-
dations for further studies are given in Section 6.
2. MODEL ASSUMPTIONS AND NETWORK REPRESENTATION
2.1. Model assumptions

To facilitate the presentation of the essential ideas without the loss of generality, we made the following
basic assumptions in this paper.
A1 Origin–destination (OD) demands are assumed to follow independent normal distributions similar
to the assumptions made in previous studies [15–17].
A2 Route flows are assumed to be mutually independent and follow the same type of statistical
distribution as that in the OD demand distribution. The coefficient of variation (CV) of route
flow is assumed to be equal to that of OD demand distribution as the works of Shao et al. [7,10].
A3 Link and route travel times are assumed to be mutually independent and follow normal
distributions [7,10].
A4 The multi-modal network model investigated in this study falls within the category of static model
for long-term planning at the strategic level. Therefore, it is assumed that all travelers in the multi-
modal network can have perfect knowledge toward traffic condition on the basis of their past
experiences.
A5 All travelers can get on the buses or trains, that is, no vehicle capacity constraint.
2.2. Multi-modal transport network

In this study, the SAM network, proposed by Lo et al. [14], is adopted to avoid unrealistic transfers and
represent non-linear fare structures involved in multi-modal networks.
Consider a multi-modal transport network M = (U, V), where U = {i} and V = {v} are, respectively,
the set of physical nodes and the set of physical links. The multi-modal network M can be divided into
w sub-networks Mb = (Ub, Vb), b 2 B, Ub ⊆ U, Vb ⊆ V, and w = |B|, where b 2 B is a specified transport
mode, and Ub and Vb, respectively, are the set of nodes and the set of links associated with the
Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. J. Adv. Transp. 2014; 48:66–85
DOI: 10.1002/atr
68 X. FU ET AL.
sub-network Mb. In this study, three transport modes (subway, auto, and bus), respectively denoted by
b1, b2, and b3, are considered. These three sub-networks are combined and represented by a strongly
connected graph G = (N, A) through a state-augmentation approach [18], where N is a set of nodes
and A is a set of links. The resultant network G is termed the SAM network.
In the SAM network, each node is described as (i, s, n, and l), where i indicates the physical
location of the node, s is the transfer state used to model probable transfers, n is the number of
transfers that has been made by a traveler, and l is the alight or aboard indicator. The value of
l equals to 1 (0), indicating that a traveler is at the beginning (end) of a direct in-vehicle link. Specifically,
each transfer state s 2 S associates with a transport modal usage (s) 2 B and a set of probable transfers
x(s) ⊆ S. If travelers are at state s, it indicates that these travelers are using mode (s), and they can only
transfer to any state in x(s).
Links in the SAM network are divided into two categories, that is, A = At ∪ Ad, where At is the set of
transfer links between modes and Ad is the set of direct in-vehicle links that are made up of physical links.
Each transfer link at 2 At is constructed according to the probable transfer states. Each in-vehicle link
aijsn 2 Ad represents a direct in-vehicle movement from location i to location j with transfer state s as
its nth mode in the trip. It should be noted that a direct in-vehicle link may consist of more than one
consecutive physical links. In this way, non-linear fares can be directly represented by node-to-node basis.
3. FORMULATION OF PASSENGER FLOW AND TRAVEL TIME DISTRIBUTIONS
3.1. Passenger flow distribution

For notation consistency, the capital letters used throughout this paper represent random variables, and
the lowercase letters represent deterministic variables. Following the model assumption A1, the travel
demand between OD pair rs (denoted as Qrs) is a random variable following a normal distribution,
Qrs ¼ qrs þ e; (1)

where qrs is the mean demand, E[Qrs] = qrs; e is the random term, E[e] = 0. Let srs
q
be the SD of the
OD demand:
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
q ¼
srs var½Qrs ¼ var½e (2)
The CV of the travel demand between OD pair rs (denoted as cvrs) can be expressed as
srs
cvrs ¼ q
(3)
qrs
Denote the passenger flow along a route p 2 Prs as Fp. Following the model assumption A2, the flow
conservation can then be expressed by following equations:
X
Qrs ¼ Fp (4)
p2Prs
X
qrs ¼ fp (5)
p2Prs
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
ffi
spf ¼ Var Fp ¼ fp cvrs 8p 2 Prs (6)
where fp and spf , respectively, are the mean and the SD of passenger flow along route p.
Denote the passenger flow on the direct in-vehicle link aijsn as Fsn ij
. It can be expressed by the
summation of passenger flows on all routes using this in-vehicle link:
DOI: 10.1002/atr
X
ij
Fsn ¼ d p; aijsn Fp 8aijsn 2 Ad (7)
p2Prs
X
fsnij ¼ d p; aijsn fp 8aijsn 2 Ad (8)
p2Prs
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
ij ffi X
sijfsn ¼ Var Fsn ¼ Var Fp d p; aijsn 8aijsn 2 Ad (9)
p2Prs

where fsnij and sijfsn, respectively, are the mean and the SD of passenger flow on link aijsn; d p; aijsn is the
ij
incidence relationship between in-vehicle link and route; d p; asn ¼ 1 indicates that the in-vehicle link

aijsn is on route p, and d p; aijsn ¼ 0 otherwise.
The passenger flow on each transfer link at 2 At is denoted as Fat . It can be calculated by summing
the passenger flows of all routes using this transfer link as
X
F at ¼ dðp; at ÞFp 8at 2 At (10)
Xrs
p2P
f at ¼ dðp; at Þfp 8at 2 At (11)
p2Ps
rs
ffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi X
saf t ¼ Var ½Fat ¼ Var Fp dðp; at Þ 8at 2 At (12)
p2Prs
where fat and saf t are the mean and the SD of passenger flow on link at, respectively; d(p, at) is the in-
cidence relationship between transfer link and route; d(p, at) = 1 means that transfer link at is on route
p, and d(p, at) = 0 otherwise.
Let Fv be the passenger flow of mode b on physical link v 2 Vb. It can be expressed as the summation
of passenger flows on all direct in-vehicle links consisting of this physical link:
X X X
Fv ¼ d aijsn ; v Fsn
ij
¼ d aijsn ; v d p; aijsn Fp 8v 2 Vb ; ðsÞ ¼ b (13)
aijsn 2Ad aijsn 2Ad p2Prs
X X X
fv ¼ d aijsn ; v fsnij ¼ d aijsn ; v d p; aijsn fp 8v 2 Vb ; ðsÞ ¼ b (14)
aijsn 2Ad aijsn 2Ad p2Prs
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
X ij ij ffi
svf ¼ Var ½Fv ¼ Var Fsn d asn ; v
aij 2A
sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
X X
sn d

¼ d aijsn ; v d p; aijsn Var Fp 8v 2 Vb ; ðsÞ ¼ b (15)
aijsn 2Ad p2Prs

where fv and svf are the mean and the SD of passenger flow on link v, respectively; d aijsn ; v is the

incidence relationship between in-vehicle link and physical link; d aijsn ; v ¼ 1 indicates that physical

link v is in the in-vehicle link aijsn and d aijsn ; v ¼ 0 otherwise.
According to the model assumptions A1 and A2, passenger flows of links and routes all follow
normal distributions:

2
ij
Fsn N fsnij ; sijfsn 8aijsn 2 Ad (16)

2
Fat N fat ; saf t 8at 2 At (17)

2
Fv N fv ; svf 8v 2 V (18)

2
Fp N fp ; spf 8p 2 Prs (19)
DOI: 10.1002/atr
70 X. FU ET AL.
3.2. Link travel time distribution

In this section, travel time distributions for physical links, direct in-vehicle links, and transfer links are
derived.
3.2.1. Physical links

In this paper, the concept of generalized travel time is adopted to model crowding discomfort in
vehicles and congestion in road traffic. The generalized travel time of the physical link v is assumed
to be strictly increasing with respect to its link flow Fv:
Tv ¼ tv ðFv Þ (20)
Z þ1
tv ¼ E ½Tv ¼ tv ðxÞ’v ðxÞdx 8v 2 V (21)
1
Z Z
2
v 2 þ1 þ1
st ¼ ðtv ðxÞÞ2 ’v ðxÞdx tv ðxÞ’v ðxÞdx 8v 2 V (22)
1 1
where Tv is the generalized physical link travel time; tv(.) is the physical link travel time function; ’v(.)
is the probability density function of link flow; tv and svt, respectively, are the mean and the SD of travel
time on physical link v.
3.2.1.1. Subway (mode b1). The generalized travel time considering in-vehicle crowding discomfort
[19,20] on physical link v for mode b1 can be expressed as

k1 !
Fv
Tv ¼ Tv tv0 ; Fv ; hb1 ; gb1 ¼ tv0 1 þ b1 8v 2 Vb1 (23)
hb1 gb1
where hb1 is the subway vehicle capacity (passengers per vehicle) and gb1 is the subway deterministic
frequency (vehicles per hour); tv0 is the free flow travel time of link v; b1 and k1 are model parameters.
As indicated earlier, link flows follow normal distributions, so the probability density function of
link flow distributions can be expressed as 0 1
2
1 B ðx f v Þ C
’v ðxÞ ¼ pffiffiffiffiffiffi v exp@ 2 A 8v 2 V (24)
2psf 2 sv f
Substituting Equations (23) and (24) into Equations (21) and (22), we have re-written the mean and
the SD of physical link travel time in mode b1 as
X
k1

b1 k1 i
tv ¼ tv0 þ tv0 svf ðfv Þk1 i ði 1Þ!! 8v 2 Vb1 (25)
ðhb1 gb1 Þk1 i¼0;i¼even i
vffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
0 1ffi
u

u X 2k1
u !2 B
2k1 i
svf ðfv Þ2k1 i ði 1Þ!! C
u B C
u B
i
!2 C
b
st ¼ u
i¼0;i¼even
v
u tv
0 1
B
C 8v 2 Vb1 (26)
u ðhb1 gb1 Þ k1 B X k1 i C
t @ k1
sf ðfv Þ ði 1Þ!! A
v k1 i
i¼0;i¼even
i
The detailed derivations of Equations (25) and (26) can be found in Shao et al. [10].
DOI: 10.1002/atr
3.2.1.2. Auto (mode b2). The link travel time considering congestion in road traffic (mode b2) can be
modeled by the most widely used Bureau of Public Roads function [21] as

k2 !
0 Xv
Tv ¼ Tv tv ; Xv ; kv ¼ tv0 1 þ g1 8v 2 Vb2 (27)
kv
where Xv is the total traffic volume on road link v; kv is the capacity of the road link, and g1 and k2 are
parameters. It should be noted that Xv consists of two components, that is, traffic volume of mode b2
(auto) and traffic volume of mode b3 (bus), because they both belong to road traffic. Therefore,
Fvb2
Xv ¼
eb þ Gb3 eb3 8v 2 V⧹Vb1 (28)
e0 2
where Gb3 is the bus frequency; Fvb2 is the passenger flow of mode b2 on road link v; eb2 and eb3 are
passenger car equivalents for modes b2 and b3; e0 is the average vehicle occupancy parameter
representing the number of passengers per auto. The first term in Equation (28) represents the traffic
volume of auto, and the second term represents the traffic volume of bus.
In the congested multi-modal transport network, the bus frequency may be not fixed because of the
variability of road travel time. Therefore, in this paper, bus frequency is considered to be a random
variable to model the interactions between bus usage and auto usage. For simplicity, the bus fleet size
s0 is assumed to be fixed, and Gb3 is determined by s0 and the cycle time of bus route. It is also assumed
that cycle time can be represented by 2Tp, where Tp is the one-way travel time of the bus route that
2
contains the physical link v, and Tp eN tp ; ðspt Þ (following model assumption A3 and will be
discussed in Section 3.3). Thus, the stochastic bus frequency Gb3 can be calculated as
s0
G b3 ¼ (29)
2Tp
The mean and the variance of the second term in Equation (28) can be obtained according to Li et al. [22]:
!
2
s0 eb3 s0 eb3 ðspt Þ
E ½Gb3 eb3 ¼ E ¼ 1þ 2 (30)
2Tp 2tp tp
2
s0 eb3 s0 2 eb3 2 ðspt Þ
Var ½Gb3 eb3 ¼ Var ¼ (31)
2Tp 4tp 4
v 2
As mentioned in Section 3.1, Fvb2 eN fvb2 ; sf 2 where fvb2 is the mean passenger flow of mode
b
vb
b2 on road link v and sf 2 is the SD of passenger flow of mode b2 on road link v. Assuming that the
traffic volume of bus and auto on the road are mutually independent, the mean and the SD of Xv
(denoted as xv and sxv , respectively) can be expressed as follows:
!
2
eb2 s0 eb3 ðspt Þ
xv ¼ fv þ 1þ 2 8v 2 V⧹Vb1 (32)
e0 b2 2tp tp
sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
e2b2 vb2 2 s0 2 eb3 2 ðspt Þ2
sxv ¼ sf þ 8v 2 V⧹Vb1 (33)
e20 4tp 4
Then, the mean and the SD of physical link travel time in mode b2 can be expressed as follows.
Xk2
g k2
tv ¼ tv0 þ tv0 1 k2 ðsxv Þi ðxv Þk2 i ði 1Þ!! 8v 2 Vb2 (34)
ðkv Þ i¼0;i¼even i
vffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
0 1ffi
u
u X2k2
u !2 B
2k2
ðsxv Þi ðxv Þ2k2 i ði 1Þ!! C
u B C
u g1 B i¼0;i¼even
i
C
v u
st ¼ u tv 0
B ! C 8v 2 Vb2

2 (35)
u ðkv Þk2 B @
X k2 C
ðsxv Þ ðxv Þ ði 1Þ!! A
t k i k i
2 2
i¼0;i¼even
i
DOI: 10.1002/atr
72 X. FU ET AL.
3.2.1.3. Bus (mode b3). The generalized travel time on physical link v for mode b3 can be expressed as

k1
k2 !
0 Fv Xv
Tv ¼ Tv tv ; Fv ; hb3 ; Gb3 ; Xv ; kv ¼ tv 1 þ b2
0
þ g2 8v 2 Vb3 (36)
hb3 Gb3 kv
where hb3 denotes the bus capacity, Gb3 is the stochastic bus frequency (referring to Section 3.2.1.2), and
b2 and g2 are model parameters. The last two terms in Equation (36) represent the crowding discomfort in
vehicle and the congestion in road traffic.
The mean and the SD of physical link travel time in mode b3 are as follows:
!

2k1 b2 tv0 Xk1

k1 i Xk1
k1 p j k1 j
k1 i
tv ¼ tv þ
0
k1 k1
sf fv ði 1Þ!!
v
st tp ðj 1Þ!!
ðhb3 Þ ðs0 Þ i¼0;i¼even i j¼0;j¼even
j
X k2
(37)
g2 tv0 k2 i k2 i
þ ðsxv Þ xv ði 1Þ!! 8v 2 Vb3
ðkv Þk2 i¼0;i¼even i
vffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
!2
u

u 2k1 b2 tv0 X2k1 X 2k1

2k1 p j 2k1 j
u 2k1 v
i
2k1 i
ð Þ!! ðj 1Þ!!
u s f v i 1 st tp
u ðhb3 Þk1 ðs0 Þk1 i¼0;i¼even i f j
u " !
j¼0;j¼even
#2
u

u 2 k1
b t 0 Xk1
k i X k1
k
svt ¼ u svf fv k1 i ði 1Þ!! spt tp k1 j ðj 1Þ!!
j
u
2 v 1 1
u ðhb3 Þk1 ðs0 Þk1 i¼0;i¼even i j
u 2 2 2k2 !2 3
j¼0;j¼even
u X
X
u ðg2 Þ2 tv0 2k2

k2
k2
tþ 4 ðsxv Þi xv 2k2 i ði 1Þ!! ðsxv Þi xv k2 i ði 1Þ!! 5
ðkv Þ2k2 i¼0;i¼even
i i¼0;i¼even
i
8v 2 Vb3 (38)
The detailed manipulations on deducing Equations (37) and (38) are given in Appendix A.
3.2.2. In-vehicle links

The in-vehicle link travel time is the summation of relevant physical link travel times.
As the means and the SDs of the physical link travel time of the three modes are given in Section
ij
3.2.1, the in-vehicle link travel time (denoted as Tsn ) of each mode can be obtained as
X
ij
Tsn ¼ Tv d aijsn ; v 8aijsn 2 Ad ; ðsÞ ¼ b (39)
v2Vb
ij
Following model assumption A3, the mean and the SD of in-vehicle link travel time (denoted as tsn
ij
and stsn , respectively) can be expressed as
X
ij
tsn ¼ tv d aijsn ; v 8aijsn 2 Ad (40)
v2Vb
sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
X 2 ij ffi
sijtsn ¼ svt d asn ; v 8aijsn 2 Ad (41)
v2Vb
3.2.3. Transfer links

There is no transfer waiting time if travelers transfer to mode b2 (auto). When travelers transfer to b1
(subway) or b3 (bus), the waiting time for transfer link at (denoted as Tat ) can be expressed as

m
l 1 Fat þ Fbi
Tat ¼ þ 8at 2 At ; b 2 fb1 ; b3 g (42)
Gb Gb Gb hb
where Fat is the passenger volume at transfer link at and Fbi is the prior passenger volume already in
mode b prior to picking up passengers at location i; Gb and hb, respectively, are the frequency and
DOI: 10.1002/atr
vehicle capacity of the boarding transport mode b; m and l are model parameters. The first term in
Equation (42) expresses the waiting time for the next arriving vehicle, and the second term is related
to the boarding congestion effect.
Specifically, the prior passenger volume can be obtained by summing the passenger flows of relevant
direct in-vehicle links that do not start from location i [14]:
X X X yz
Fbi ¼ yz
Fsn sn ; v
d ayz i;iþ1
¼ sn ; v
Fp d ayz i;iþ1
d p; asn (43)
ayz
sn 2Ad ;8y6¼i;ðsÞ¼b ayz
sn 2Ad ;8y6¼i; ðsÞ¼b p2P
rs
where vi;iþ1 is the physical link from i to its next station i + 1 in mode b1 or b3; Fsn yz
is the passenger flow on
in-vehicle link asn from y to z that does not start from i. For simplicity, Fat and Fbi are assumed to be in-
yz
dependent from each other, then the mean and the SD of Fat þ Fbi (denoted as f1 and s1) can be expressed
as follows: X X X yz
f1 ¼ fp dðp; at Þ þ sn ; v
fp d ayz i;iþ1
d p; asn (44)
yz
rs
asn 2Ad ;8y6¼i;ðsÞ¼b p2P rs
sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
p2P
X p 2 X X p 2 yz
s1 ¼ sf dðp; at Þ þ sf d asn ; vi;iþ1 dðp; ayz sn Þ (45)
p2Prs ayz
sn 2Ad ;8y6¼j; ðsÞ¼b p2P
rs

Following model assumption A2, ðFat þ Fbi Þ N f1 ; s21 .
As indicated earlier, the subway frequency Gb ¼ gb1 is a constant. Thus, the mean and the SD of
waiting time for each transfer link to b1 (subway) can be expressed as
X m
l 1 m
t at ¼ þ mþ1 m
ðs1 Þi ðf1 Þmi ði 1Þ!! 8at 2 At (46)
gb1 ðgb1 Þ ðhb1 Þ i¼0;i¼even i
vffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
0 1ffi
u
u X 2m
u !2 B
2m
ðs1 Þi ðf1 Þ2mi ði 1Þ!! C
u B C
u B
i
!2 C
1
sat t ¼ u
i¼0;i¼even
u B
C 8at 2 At (47)
mþ1
u ðgb1 Þ ðhb1 Þ m B X m C
t @ m i mi
ðs1 Þ ðf1 Þ ði 1Þ!! A
i¼0;i¼even
i
However, when travelers transfer to b3 (bus), Gb (i.e., Gb 3 ) is stochastic as formulated in Section

3.2.1.2. Thus, the mean and the SD of waiting time for each transfer link to b3 (bus) can be expressed as
mþ1
X m
2ltp 2 m
t at ¼ þ ðs1 Þi f1 mi ði 1Þ!! (48)
s0 s0 mþ1 hb3 m i¼0;i¼even i
m þ 1
X m þ 1 p j mþ1j
s t tp ðj 1Þ!!
j
j¼0; j¼even
vffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
u 2
X
X 2m þ 2
j
u 4l p 2 22mþ2
2m
2m i 2mi
2mþ2
u
u s0 2 st þ s0 2mþ2 hb 2m i
s1 f1 ði 1Þ!!
j
spt tp 2mþ2j ðj 1Þ!!
u 3 i¼0;i¼even j¼0;j¼even
u " #2
u mþ1
X
mþ1
X
m þ 1 p j mþ1j
m
u 2 m i mi
u s1 f1 ði 1Þ!! st tp ðj 1Þ!!
u s0 mþ1 hb3 m i¼0;i¼even i j
at u
st ¼ u j¼0;j¼even

X
Xmþ2
u mþ2 m
m þ 2 p j mþ2j
uþ2 2 l m i mi
s f ð i 1 Þ!! st tp ðj 1Þ!!
u s0 mþ2 hb3 m i¼0;i¼even i
1 1
j
u
u
X
j¼0;j¼even
mþ1
u mþ2 m X m þ 1 p j mþ1j
t 2 2 ltp m i mi
s f ð i 1 Þ!! st tp ðj 1Þ!!
1 1
s0 mþ2 hb3 m i¼0;i¼even i j¼0;j¼even
j
(49)
DOI: 10.1002/atr
74 X. FU ET AL.
The detailed manipulations on deducing Equations (48) and (49) can be found in Appendix B.
3.3. Route travel time distribution

The route travel time Tp can be obtained by summing the travel times on direct in-vehicle links and
travel times on transfer links:
X X
Tp ¼ ij
Tsn d p; aijsn þ Tat dðp; at Þ 8p 2 Prs (50)
aijsn 2Ad at 2At
Following model assumption A3, the mean and the SD of route travel time can be expressed as
X X
tp ¼ ij
tsn d p; aijsn þ tat dðp; at Þ 8p 2 Prs (51)
aijsn 2Ad at 2At
sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
X ij 2 ij X a 2
st ¼
p
stsn d p; asn þ ðst t Þ dðp; at Þ 8p 2 Prs (52)
aijsn 2Ad at 2At

2
and the route travel time follows a normal distribution: Tp N tp ; ðspt Þ
4. MODEL FORMULATION AND SOLUTION ALGORITHM
4.1. Model formulation

As mentioned earlier, demand uncertainty leads to travel time variability. Under travel time uncer-
tainty, travelers would assign an extra time to ensure a high probability of on-time (referring to gener-
alized travel time in this paper) arrival. The concept of travel time budget proposed by Lo et al. [5] is
adopted. The travel time budget in this paper is defined as the summation of mean generalized route
travel time and a safety margin of generalized route travel time.
Let a be the probability of arriving at destination within the travel time budget and cp be the travel
time budget for a given reliability threshold a. The value of a expresses travelers’ risk attitude toward
on-time arrival. A larger a indicates a higher expectation of on-time arrival. This value of a can be
pre-determined according
to
travelers’ socio-economic characteristics and trip purposes [23].
2
Because Tp eN tp ; ðspt Þ , the travel time budget can be expressed as
cp ¼ tp þ Φ1 ðaÞspt 8p 2 Prs (53)
1
where Φ (a) is the inverse of standard normal cumulative distribution function at the probability of a.
If a = 50%, Φ 1(a) = 0, and the safety margin is equal to zero. This indicates that travelers are risk-
neural and only concern mean travel time for their travels. Under this circumstance, the travel time
budget cp is equal to the mean travel time tp. Therefore, the RUE results should be close to that of
UE model when a = 0.5. However, it should be noted that in the RUE model when a = 0.5, the mean
travel times are still related to the SD of traffic flow [see Equations (25, 34, 37, 46, and 48)]. As such,
the RUE model is not exactly equivalent to the traditional UE model when a = 0.5.
In this paper, the travel time budget and the route fare both contribute to the route dis-utility
(denoted as ’p). The route dis-utility function can be represented as
’p ¼ o1 cp o2 rp 8p 2 Prs (54)
where rp is the fare of a specific route p, and o1 and o2 are parameters. Specifically, rp can be calcu-
lated by summing the fares of in-vehicle links as
X
rp ¼ rijsn d p; aijsn 8p 2 Prs (55)
aijsn 2Ad
where rijsn
is the fare with respect to the in-vehicle link aijsn . The fare of each in-vehicle link is repre-
sented node to node. Thus, it is non-linear, not the summation of individual physical link fares.
Because this study falls in the category of static model for long-term planning at the strategic level, it
is postulated that all travelers in multi-modal networks would have a RUE route choice pattern: for
each OD pair, the dis-utilities of all used routes are smallest and equal, and all unused routes have
DOI: 10.1002/atr
larger dis-utilities. Denote p 2 Prs as the most reliable route that has the smallest route dis-utility. The
RUE condition can be formally expressed as

f p ’p ’p ¼ 0 8p 2 Prs (56)
’p ’p ≥0 8p 2 Prs (57)
The aforementioned RUE problem can be further expressed as the following gap function formulation:
X
min GAP ¼ f p ’p ’ p (58)
p2Prs
’p ’p ≥0 (59)
fp ≥0 (60)
The gap function refers to the overall gap capturing the complementary slackness conditions of the
RUE model.
4.2. Solution algorithm

Most traditional solution algorithms cannot be used to solve the proposed RUE model, because it is
difficult to determine the decent direction for solving the problem concerned. The widely used method
of successive average (MSA) is a heuristic method with a forced convergence property. Therefore, in
this paper, a solution algorithm based on MSA is proposed for solving the aforementioned RUE prob-
lem. The detailed steps for the solution algorithm are presented as follows.
Step 0 Transform the traditional multi-modal network to a SAM network. List all the feasible routes
in the SAM network according to the pre-defined probable transfer states.
Step 1 Calculate free-flow route travel times {tp}. Set fspt g ¼ f0g. Then get free-flow route dis-
utilities {’p} on the basis of {tp}, fspt g and fares. Perform all-or-nothing
assignment on the
n o
basis of {’p} to obtain route flows and link flows f 1
¼ f v ; 8v 2 V . n =o1.
Set n
Step 2 Get the SDs of link flow svf and SDs of route travel time fspt g. Use f n , svf , {tp}, and fspt g
to update link travel times. Then get new {tp} and fspt g. After that, get new route dis-utilities {’p}.
Step 3 Perform all-or-nothing assignment on the basis of route dis-utilities {’p}, yielding auxiliary
n
link flows f . n
Step 4 Calculate new link flows using an MSA scheme f nþ1 ¼ fn þ ð1=nÞ f f n .
Step 5 For an acceptable convergence level t, if max f nþ1 f n ≤t, stop; otherwise, set n = n + 1,
v
go to Step 2.
5. NUMERICAL EXAMPLE
To demonstrate the aforementioned RUE formulation, we adopted in this study the network used in
Lo et al. [14]. As shown in Figure 1, the network consisted of 9 nodes and 20 links. Only one OD
pair was considered in this example. The origin was set as Node 1, and the destination was set as
Node 9. Following model assumption A1, OD demand followed a normal distribution. The CV of
the OD demand is set as 0.3. Modal transfers follow the probable transfer states defined in Lo et al.
[14]. The resulting feasible routes are listed in Table I.
In this numerical example, the model parameters were set as follows: b1 = 0.01, k1 = 2, g1 = 0.3,
k2 = 2, e0 = 1.2, eb2 ¼ 1; eb3 ¼ 3; b2 = 0.007, g2 = 0.01, l = 0.5, m = 2, o1 = 0.123, and o2 = 0.09. The
link capacity of each road link was 800 vehicles per hour. Free-flow travel time of each roadway link
was set as 20 minutes, and travel time of each subway link was set as 19 minutes. The fare of traveling
by auto was nine units per link (fuel cost), whereas the non-linear fares of subway and bus are shown
in Tables II and III, respectively. The capacity of subway was 3200 passengers per vehicle, and the
frequency was eight vehicles per hour. The capacity of bus was 180 passengers per vehicle, and the
fleet size was 20 vehicles.
DOI: 10.1002/atr
76 X. FU ET AL.
Figure 1. The multi-modal network.
Table I. Feasible routes according to probable transfer states.
Route number Modal usage (1—subway; 2—auto; 3—bus) Transfer segment (node to node)
1 1 1!9
2 3 1!9
3 2 1!9
4 3–1 1!6!9
5 2–1 1!6!9
6 1–3 1!6!9
7 2–1 1!5!9
8 2–3 1!6!9
9 2–3 1!3!9
10 2–3 1!2!9
11 2–1 1!4!9
12 2–3–1 1!3!6!9
13 2–1–3 1!5!6!9
14 2–3–1 1!2!6!9
15 2–1–3 1!4!6!9
Table II. Non-linear fares of the subway.
To node
From node 4 5 6 9
1 10 25 45 45
4 10 25 45
5 10 25
6 10
Table III. Non-linear fares of the bus.
To node
From node 2 3 6 9
1 8 8 8 8
2 8 8 8
3 4 4
6 4
DOI: 10.1002/atr
The convergence characteristics of the proposed RUE solution algorithm are illustrated in Figure 2.
It can be seen that the RUE condition at relative gap of 104 has been achieved after 9864 iterations
(when q = 3000, t = 0.1). This result indicates that the proposed MSA solution algorithm can solve
the RUE problem for this typical network with an acceptable accuracy level.
Travelers’ travel behaviors, in terms of mode and route choices, were investigated under different
levels of OD demand and on-time arrival probability. Note that the on-time arrival in this paper refers
to generalized travel time. Figure 3 shows the variation of modal split when the mean of the OD
demand (q) increases from 3000 passengers per hour to 30 000 passengers per hour under different
probabilities of on-time arrival (a). Figure 3a–c, respectively, depicts the percentages of travelers using
different transport modes (subway, bus, and auto).
It can be seen from Figure 3 that as the mean of the OD demand increases from 3000 to 30 000, the
percentage of modal split for subway increases dramatically. For example, with a 90% probability of
on-time arrival ( a= 0.9), the percentage of subway travelers increases from 36.74% to 84.51%. On the
contrary, the percentages of modal split for bus and auto both decrease (from 39.67% to 6.52% and
from 23.59% to 8.97%, respectively). This may be due to that large OD demand results in severe traffic
congestion on the road. In view of this, travelers tend to choose more reliable subway that has fixed
frequency and no congestion interactions with bus and auto.
From the earlier discussions, it can be found that the OD demand level influences travelers’ route
and mode choice behaviors. In addition, the on-time arrival probability also has significant effects
on travelers’ route and mode choice behaviors.
For a certain level of OD demand, with the increase of a, the number of people traveling by subway
rises, whereas the numbers of people traveling by auto and bus decrease. For example, when q = 3000,
with a= 50%, 25.65% of travelers use subway, and this percentage increases to 36.74% when a
reaches 90%. However, for bus and auto usage, the percentages decrease from 46.45% to 39.67%
and from 27.90% to 23.59%, respectively. This result may be because the demand variation has a
slighter impact on the generalized travel time of subway than on road traffic.
However, when q becomes larger, this phenomenon is less prominent. For instance, when
q = 30 000, with the increase of a, variations of modal split are all within 1% (84.37% to 84.51%
for subway, 6.81% to 6.52% for bus, and 8.82% to 8.97% for auto). For auto, there is even a slight
increase (8.82% to 8.97%) as compared with the downtrend in a smaller demand. This shows that
when OD demand is very large, most travelers will not change their mode choices to improve the prob-
ability of on-time arrival. The reason may be that the large OD demand makes the crowding discomfort
in a subway considerable. In this situation, none of the available transport modes are reliable; and
Number of iterations
1.00E+00
1 3001 6001 9001
5.00E-01
2.50E-01
1.25E-01 8864 9364 9864

8.80E-04
Relative Gap*
6.25E-02
8.60E-04
3.13E-02
8.40E-04
1.56E-02 8.20E-04
7.81E-03 8.00E-04
7.80E-04
3.91E-03
1.95E-03
9.77E-04
4.88E-04
*Relative Gap = GAP / ∑ fp p

p∈Prs
Figure 2. Convergence characteristics of the solution algorithm.
DOI: 10.1002/atr
78 X. FU ET AL.
84.37%
46.45%
84.51%
% Percentage of modal split (subway) 50
% Percentage of modal split (bus)

90
45
80 39.67%
40
70
35
60
30
50 6.81%
25
40
25.65% 20
6.52%
30 15
20 10 0.5
30000
0.5 5 0.6
21000 0.6 30000 0.7
36.74% 0.7 21000
12000
0.8
12000 0.9
0.8 3000
Mean of OD demand (q ) 3000 0.9 Mean of OD demand (q ) Probability of on-time arrival ( )
Probability of on-time arrival ( )
(a) (b)
50
% Percentage of modal split (auto)
45
40 27.90%
35
30 23.59%
25
8.82%
20 8.97%
15
10
5 0.5
30000 0.6
21000 0.7
12000 0.8
3000 0.9
Mean of OD demand (q ) Probability of on-time arrival ( )
(c)
Figure 3. Modal splits under different levels of OD demand and on-time arrival probabilities: (a) subway, (b) bus,
and (c) auto.
therefore, some people prefer to use auto to avoid the discomfort in transit vehicles. Thus, in the
congested transport networks at metropolitan areas, the subway is normally more reliable than other
transport modes if a traveler has a higher expectation of on-time arrival, but when the network
560 Transfer No Transfer 2640
2596
520 506 2600
(without modal transfers)
(with modal transfers)
Route passenger flow

Route passenger flow
480 2560
440 2520
2494
404
400 2480
360 2440
0.5 0.55 0.6 0.65 0.7 0.75 0.8 0.85 0.9
Probability of on-time arrival (α)
Figure 4. Travelers’ attitudes toward modal transfer under different on-time arrival probabilities.
DOI: 10.1002/atr
becomes extremely overcrowded, the subway will no longer be attractive because of the considerable
crowding discomfort on the trains.
Additionally, travelers’ attitudes toward modal transfers under different probabilities of on-time arrival
were demonstrated. The results are illustrated in Figure 4. As discussed in Section 3, each modal transfer
needs a transfer waiting time and thus brings a penalty in the route utility. Transfer waiting times are
generally varied and stochastic because of the demand uncertainty, so modal transfers may bring some
uncertainties for people’s on-time arrivals. As a increases, travelers tend to choose the routes without
any modal transfer. For example, when a increases from 50% to 90% (q = 3000), the number of travelers
using single transport mode increases from 2494 to 2596, whereas the number of travelers who use modal
transfers decreases from 506 to 404.
6. CONCLUSIONS
This paper presented a new travel time reliability-based traffic assignment model in multi-modal
transport networks (including auto, bus, and subway modes) with demand variations. To capture the
effects of demand uncertainty, we formulated passenger flows and generalized travel times of different
transport modes as random variables. In this paper, the bus fleet size was assumed to be fixed, and the
stochastic bus frequency derived from unstable travel time of bus route was explicitly considered. The
probable transfers and the non-linear fare structures, involved in the multi-modal transport networks,
were explicitly modeled by using the SAM network.
Travelers’ route and mode choice behaviors under stochastic multi-modal networks were also incor-
porated in the proposed model. To capture travelers’ route and mode choice behaviors, we adopted the
travel time budget, which is defined as the summation of the mean and the safety margin of generalized
route travel time, in this new model. On the basis of this travel choice criterion, a RUE condition was
then proposed. The multi-modal RUE problem was solved by a path-based solution algorithm using
the MSA. The model and the solution algorithm were tested using a hypothetical network. The results
of the numerical example indicated that with a high expectation of on-time arrival, travelers tend to use
the subway and avoid modal transfers.
In this paper, some model assumptions are adopted. These assumptions may cause some potential
biases. It is assumed that OD demands are mutually independent, which may overestimate or underes-
timate the variance and the covariance of link/route flows. The ignorance of link travel time correla-
tions may underestimate the route travel time variances [24]. The incorporation of such correlations
in the proposed multi-modal traffic assignment model is a significant extension of this paper. For the
assumption of no vehicle capacity constraint, in some Asian cities, not all travelers can get on the first-
arrival transit vehicles during peak periods. Capacity constraints do exist and may result in crowding
effects on transit systems, so the proposed model can be extended by the incorporation of the capacity
constraints. For all normal distribution assumptions, it should be noted that normal distribution allows
negative values in principle, which may not be plausible in the real world. However, if the model fits well
to the observed data, this disadvantage can be negligible [25]. Other types of probability distribution can
also be adopted, such as log-normal distribution [26], Poisson distribution [27], and truncated normal dis-
tribution. If different distributions are adopted, further investigations on the properties of these distri-
butions and different analysis approaches should be carried out. In addition, in this paper, a path
enumeration technique was adopted to solve the proposed multi-modal RUE problem, because of the
non-additive property of generalized travel time budget. This path numeration technique, however, is only
appropriate for small multi-modal networks [23]. How to develop efficient path-based solution algorithm
based on column generation technique without requirement of path enumeration needs to be further
investigated.
7. LISTS OF SYMBOLS AND ABBREVIATIONS
7.1. Abbreviations
UE user equilibrium
RUE reliability-based user equilibrium
DOI: 10.1002/atr
80 X. FU ET AL.
RSUE reliability-based stochastic user equilibrium

SD standard deviation
SAM state-augmented multi-modal
OD origin-destination
CV coefficient of variation
MSA method of successive average
7.2. Parameters
b1, k1 model parameters in Equation (23)

g1, k2 model parameters in Equation (27)
eb2 ; eb3 passenger car equivalents for mode b2 and b3
e0 average vehicle occupancy parameter representing the number of passengers per auto
b2, g2 model parameters in Equation (36)
m, l model parameters in Equation (42)
o1, o2 model parameters in Equation (54)
7.3. Variables
M multi-modal transport network; M = (U, V)

U set of physical nodes; U = {i}
V set of physical links; V = {v}
B set of transport modes
b individual transport mode; b 2 B; b1 (subway), b2 (auto), b3 (bus)
Ub set of physical nodes associated to mode b; Ub ⊆ U
Vb set of physical links associated to mode b; Vb ⊆ V
w number of transport modes; w = |B|
Mb sub-network of mode b; Mb = (Ub, Vb)
G SAM network; G = (N, A)
N set of SAM nodes
i physical location of SAM node
s transfer state of SAM node; s 2 S
n number of prior transfers to current SAM node
l alight or aboard indicator
S set of probable transfer states
A set of SAM links; A = At ∪ Ad
At set of transfer links in SAM network; At={at}
Ad set of direct in-vehicle links in SAM network; Ad ¼ aijsn
(s) associated transport mode of state s; (s) 2 B
x(s) set of probable transfers from state s; x(s) ⊆ S
Qrs travel demand between OD pair rs
qrs mean of OD demand
srsq
SD of OD demand
cvrs CV of travel demand between OD pair rs
Prs set of routes between OD pair rs
Fp passenger flow along route p 2 Prs
fp mean of passenger flow along route p
spf SD of passenger flow along route p
Fsnij
passenger flow on direct in-vehicle link aijsn
ij
fsn mean of passenger flow on in-vehicle link aijsn
sijfsn SD of passenger flow on in-vehicle link aijsn
dp; aijsn incidence relationship between in-vehicle link and route
d p; aijsn ¼ 1 if in-vehicle link aijsn is on route p; 0 otherwise
DOI: 10.1002/atr
F at passenger flow on transfer link at

f at mean of passenger flow on transfer link at
saf t SD of passenger flow on transfer link at
d(p, at) incidence relationship between transfer link and route
d(p, at) = 1 if transfer link at is on route p; 0 otherwise
Fv passenger flow of mode v on physical link v 2 Vb
fv mean of passenger flow on link v
svf SD of passenger flow on link v
daijsn ; v incidence relationship between in-vehicle link and physical link
d aijsn ; v ¼ 1 if physical link v is in in-vehicle link aijsn ; 0 otherwise
Tv generalized travel time of physical link v
tv mean travel time of physical link v
svt SD of travel time of physical link v
hb1 subway vehicle capacity (passengers per vehicle)
gb1 deterministic frequency of subway (vehicles per hour)
tv0 free flow travel time of link v
Xv total traffic volume on road link v
xv mean of total traffic volume on road link v
s xv SD of total traffic volume on road link v
kv capacity of the road link v
G b3 stochastic bus frequency
Fvb2 passenger flow of mode b2 on road link v
fvb2 mean passenger flow of mode b2 on road link v
vb
sf 2 SD of passenger flow of mode b2 on road link v
hb3 bus capacity
ij
Tsn travel time of in-vehicle link aijsn
ij
tsn mean of in-vehicle link travel time
sijtsn SD of in-vehicle link travel time
Tat waiting time of transfer link at
t at mean of transfer link waiting time
sat t SD of transfer link waiting time
F at passenger volume at transfer link at
Fbi prior passenger volume already in mode b prior to picking up passengers at location i
Gb frequency of the boarding transport mode b
hb vehicle capacity of the boarding transport mode b
vi;iþ1 physical link from i to its next station i + 1 in mode b1 or b3
f1 mean of Fat þ Fbi
s1 SD of Fat þ Fbi
Tp travel time of route p
tp mean route travel time
spt SD of route travel time
a probability of on-time arrival
cp travel time budget
Φ 1(a) inverse of standard normal cumulative distribution function at the probability of a
’p route dis-utility
rp fare of route p
rijsn fare of in-vehicle link aijsn
p the most reliable route with the smallest route dis-utility; p 2 Prs
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This work described in this paper was jointly supported by a Postgraduate Studentship and a research
grant from the Research Grant Council of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region to the Hong
Kong Polytechnic University (Project No. PolyU 5215/09E).
DOI: 10.1002/atr
82 X. FU ET AL.
REFERENCES
1. Abdel-Aty M, Kitamura R, Jovanis P. Investigating effect of travel time variability on route choice using repeated-
measurement stated preference data. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research
Board 1995; 1493:39–45.
2. Brownstone D, Ghosh A, Golob TF, Kazimi C, Van Amelsfort D. Drivers’ willingness-to-pay to reduce travel time:
evidence from the San Diego I-15 congestion pricing project. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice
2003; 37:373–387.
3. de Palma A, Picard N. Route choice decision under travel time uncertainty. Transportation Research Part A:
Policy and Practice 2005; 39:295–324.
4. Lam T, Small K. The value of time and reliability: measurement from a value pricing experiment. Transportation
Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review 2001; 37:231–251.
5. Lo HK, Luo XW, Siu BWY. Degradable transport network: travel time budget of travelers with heterogeneous risk
aversion. Transportation Research Part B: Methodological 2006; 40:792–806.
6. Wardrop JG. Some theoretical aspects of road traffic research. Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers
1952; 1:325–378.
7. Shao H, Lam WHK, Meng Q, Tam ML. Demand driven travel time reliability-based traffic assignment problem.
Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board 2006a; 1985:220–230.
8. Siu BWY, Lo HK. Doubly uncertain transportation network: degradable capacity and stochastic demand. European
Journal of Operational Research 2008; 191:166–181.
9. Zhou Z, Chen A. Comparative analysis of three user equilibrium models under stochastic demand. Journal of
Advanced Transportation 2008; 42:239–263.
10. Shao H, Lam WHK, Tam ML. A reliability-based stochastic traffic assignment model for network with multiple user
classes under uncertainty in demand. Networks and Spatial Economics 2006b; 6:173–204.
11. Shao H, Lam WHK, Tam ML, Yuan XM. Modelling rain effects on risk-taking behaviours of multi-user classes in
road networks with uncertainty. Journal of Advanced Transportation 2008; 42:265–290.
12. Yang L, Lam WHK. Probit-type reliability-based transit network assignment. Transportation Research Record:
Journal of the Transportation Research Board 2006; 1977:154–163.
13. Zhang YQ, Lam WHK, Sumalee A, Lo HK, Tong CO. The multi-class schedule-based transit assignment model
under network uncertainties. Public Transport 2010; 2:69–86.
14. Lo HK, Yip CW, Wan KH. Modeling transfer and non-linear fare structure in multi-modal network. Transportation
Research Part B: Methodological 2003; 37:149–170.
15. Asakura Y, Kashiwadani M. Road network reliability caused by daily fluctuation of traffic flow. European Transport,
Highway & Planning 1991; 19:73–84.
16. Chen A, Subprasom K, Ji ZW. Mean-variance model for the build-operate-transfer scheme under demand uncer-
tainty. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board 2003; 1857:93–101.
17. Waller ST, Schofer JL, Ziliaskopoulos AK. Evaluation with traffic assignment under demand uncertainty. Transpor-
tation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board 2001; 1771:69–74.
18. Bertsekas DP. An auction algorithm for the max-flow problem. Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications
1995; 87:69–101.
19. Nielsen OA. A stochastic transit assignment model considering differences in passengers utility functions. Transpor-
tation Research Part B: Methodological 2000; 34:377–402.
20. Spiess H. On Optimal Route Choice Strategies in Transit Networks. Centre de Recherche sur les Transports:
Universite de Montreal, 1983.
21. Sheffi Y. Urban Transportation Networks: Equilibrium Analysis with Mathematical Programming Methods.
Prentice-Hall: Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1985.
22. Li ZC, Lam WHK, Wong SC. The optimal transit fare structure under different market regimes with uncertainty in
the network. Networks and Spatial Economics 2009; 9:191–216.
23. Chen BY, Lam WHK, Sumalee A, Shao H. An efficient solution algorithm for solving multi-class reliability-based
traffic assignment problem. Mathematical and Computer Modelling 2011a; 54:1428–1439.
24. Chen BY, Lam WHK, Sumalee A, Li Z. Reliable shortest path finding in stochastic networks with spatial
correlated link travel times. International Journal of Geographical Information Science 2011b. (Accepted).
DOI: 10.1080/13658816.2011.598133
25. Watling D. User equilibrium traffic network assignment with stochastic travel times and late arrival penalty. European
Journal of Operational Research 2006; 175:1539–1556.
26. Zhao Y, Kockelman KM. The propagation of uncertainty through travel demand models. The Annals of Regional
Science 2002; 36:145–163.
27. Clark S, Watling D. Modeling network travel time reliability under stochastic demand. Transportation Research
Part B: Methodological 2005; 39:19–140.
28. Weisstein WE. Gaussian integral. MathWorld—a Wolfram web resource. http://mathworld.wolfram.com/
GaussianIntegral.html [15 October 2005].
DOI: 10.1002/atr
APPENDIX A.
Substituting Equation (29) in Equation (36) gives the following equation

k2
2Fv Tp k1 0 Xv
Tv ¼ tv0 þ b2 tv0 þ g2 tv ¼ A1 þ A2 þ A3
hb3 s0 kv

2
p 2
As discussed before, Tp N tp ; ðst Þ , Fv N fv ; svf , Xv N xv ; ðsxv Þ2
Then, the following equations can be obtained.
!

2k1 b2 tv0 X k1
k1 i X k1
k1 p j k1 j
k1 i
E ½A 2 ¼ k1 k1
s v
f f v ð i 1 Þ!! st tp ðj 1Þ!!
j
Xk2
g t0 k2
E ½A3 ¼ 2 vk2 ðsxv Þi xv k2 i ði 1Þ!!
!2

2k1 b2 tv0 X2k1

2k1 i X
2k1
2k1 p j 2k1 j
2k1 i
var½A2 ¼ s v
f fv ð i 1 Þ!! st tp ðj 1Þ!!
ðhb3 Þk1 ðs0 Þk1 i¼0;i¼even i j¼0;j¼even
j
" !

#2
2k1 b2 tv0 Xk1
k1 i X k1
k1 p j k1 j
k1 i
sf fv ði 1Þ!!
v
st tp ðj 1Þ!!
ðhb3 Þk1 ðs0 Þk1 i¼0;i¼even i j
2 j¼0;j¼even
!2 3
2 0 2 X
X
ðg Þ t 2k2
2k2
k2
k2
var½A3 ¼ 2 2kv2 4 ðsxv Þi xv 2k2 i ði 1Þ!! ðsxv Þi xv k2 i ði 1Þ!! 5
ðk v Þ i¼0;i¼even
i i¼0;i¼even
i
Particularly, the manipulations of E[A2] and var[A2] are similar to the detailed manipulations of E
[I2] and var[I2] in Appendix B.
For simplicity, it is assumed that A2 and A3 are mutually independent. Then, Equations (37) and
(38) can be obtained as follows.
! tv ¼ E ½A1 þ E ½A2 þ E ½A3

X
X
k1 p j k1 j
k1 k1
2k1 b2 tv0 k1 i
k1 i
¼ tv þ
0
k1 k1
sf fv ði 1Þ!!
v
st tp ðj 1Þ!!
j
X k2
g2 tv0 k2
þ k2
ðsxv Þi xv k2 i ði 1Þ!!
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
svt ¼ var½A2 þ var½A3
vffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
u !2

u 2k1 b2 tv0 X2k1 X 2k1

2k1 p j 2k1 j
u 2k1 v
i
2k1 i
ð Þ!! ðj 1Þ!!
u s f f v i 1 st tp
u ðhb3 Þk1 ðs0 Þk1 i¼0;i¼even i j
u " !
j¼0;j¼even
#2
u X
X
u 2 k1
b t 0 k1
k i k1
k
¼u svf fv k1 i ði 1Þ!! spt tp k1 j ðj 1Þ!!
j
u ð h Þ k1 ð s Þ k1
2 v 1 1
u i j
u
b3
2 0 i¼0;i¼even j¼0;j¼even
!2 3
u 2 0 2 X
X
u ð g Þ t 2k2
2k2
k2
k2
t þ 2 2kv 4 ðsxv Þi xv 2k2 i ði 1Þ!! ðsxv Þi xv k2 i ði 1Þ!! 5
ðkv Þ 2 i¼0;i¼even
i i¼0;i¼even
i
DOI: 10.1002/atr
84 X. FU ET AL.
APPENDIX B.
The detailed manipulations on deducing Equations (48) and (49) are given as follows.
Substituting Equation (29) in Equation (42) gives the following equation.
mþ1
2lTp 2
ðFat þ Fbi Þ Tp mþ1 ¼ I1 þ I2
m
Tat ¼ þ
s0 s0 hb3 m
mþ1

As discussed before, Tp N tp ; ðspt Þ , ðFat þ Fbi Þ N f1 ; s21 . For simplicity, we transfer the
2
notations in the following equations, that is, t = tp, s2 ¼ spt , F ¼ Fat þ Fbi , and f = f1. Then,
2lt
E ½ I1 ¼
s0
4l2 2
var½I1 ¼ 2 s2
s ! !
0 mþ1
2 R þ1 R þ1 m mþ1 1 ðx f Þ2 1 ðy t Þ2
E ½ I2 ¼ x y pffiffiffiffiffiffi exp pffiffiffiffiffiffi exp dxdy
s0 mþ1 hb3 m 1 1 2ps1 2s1 2 2ps2 2s2 2
Substituting z1 ¼ xf
s1 ; z2 ¼ s2 in the aforementioned equation gives
yt

2m R þ1 z2 2 R þ1 z1 2
E ½ I2 ¼ 1 ðz2 s2 þ t Þmþ1 exp 1 ð z s
1 1 þ f Þ m
exp dz1 dz2
ps0 mþ1 hb3 m" 2 2

m

Z þ1 X
#
2 m R þ1 X
mþ1
mþ1 j mþ1j z2 2 m i mi z1 2
¼ ð z s Þ t exp ð z s Þ f exp dz1 dz2
ps0 mþ1 hb3 m 1 j¼0
2 2 1 1
j 2 1 i¼0 i 2

"

m
Z þ1
#
2m R þ1 X
mþ1
mþ1 j mþ1j z2 2 X m i mi z1 2
¼ ðz2 s2 Þ t exp ðs1 Þ f z1 exp
i
dz1 dz2
ps0 mþ1 hb3 m 1 j¼0 j 2 i¼0 i 1 2
According to the MathWorld website [28], it follows that
Z þ1

z1 2 0 if i is odd
z1 i exp dz1 ¼ pffiffiffiffiffiffi
1 2 2pði 1Þ!! if i is even
Therefore,

"

X
#
2m R þ1 X mþ1
mþ1 j mþ1j z2 2
m pffiffiffiffiffiffi m i mi
E ½I 2 ¼ ðz2 s2 Þ t exp 2p ðs1 Þ f ði 1Þ!! dz2
ps0 mþ1 hb3 m 1 j¼0 j 2 i¼0;i¼even i

X
"
#
m pffiffiffiffiffiffi m mþ1
X
Z þ1
2m i mi mþ1 j mþ1j z 2
2
¼ 2p ðs1 Þ f ði 1Þ!! ðs2 Þ t z2 j exp dz2
ps0 mþ1 hb3 m i¼0;i¼even i j¼0
j 1 2
mþ1
X m
mþ1
X
2 m i mi mþ1
¼ ð s 1 Þ f ð i 1 Þ!! ðs2 Þj tmþ1j ðj 1Þ!!
j
DOI: 10.1002/atr
With similar manipulations, the following equations can be obtained.

X 2m
X 2m þ 2
2mþ2
22mþ2 2m i 2mi
E ½I2 ¼
2
ðs1 Þ f ði 1Þ!! ðs2 Þj t 2mþ2j ðj 1Þ!!
s0 2mþ2 hb3 2m i¼0;i¼even
i j¼0;j¼even
j
var½I2 ¼ E ½I2 2 ðE ½I2 Þ2

X 2m
X 2m þ 2
2mþ2
22mþ2 2m i 2mi
¼ ðs1 Þ f ði 1Þ!! ðs2 Þj t 2mþ2j ðj 1Þ!!
s0 2mþ2 hb3 2m i¼0;i¼even i j¼0;j¼even
j
"
X
#2
m mþ1
X
2mþ1 m i mi mþ1 j mþ1j

ðs1 Þ f ði 1Þ!! ðs2 Þ t ðj 1Þ!!
j
mþ2
X m
mþ2
X
2 l m i mi mþ2
E ½ I1 I2 ¼ ð s 1 Þ f ð i 1 Þ!! ðs2 Þj t mþ2j ðj 1Þ!!
j
covðI1 ; I2 Þ ¼ E ½I1 I2 E ½I1 E ½I2
mþ2
X m
mþ2
X
2 l m i mi mþ2
¼ ðs1 Þ f ði 1Þ!! ðs2 Þj t mþ2j ðj 1Þ!!
j
mþ2
X m
mþ1
X
2 lt m i mi mþ1
ðs1 Þ f ði 1Þ!! ðs2 Þj t mþ1j ðj 1Þ!!
j
Therefore, Equations (48) and (49) can be obtained by the following equation.
tat ¼ E ½Tat ¼ E ½I1 þ E ½I2

mþ1
X
mþ1
X
m þ 1 p j mþ1j
m
2ltp 2 m i mi
¼ þ ðs1 Þ f1 ði 1Þ!! st tp ðj 1Þ!!
s0 s0 mþ1 hb3 m i¼0;i¼even i j
p ffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi ffi j¼0;j¼even
¼ ffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
sat t v var½I1 þ var½I2 þ 2covðI1 ; I2 Þ ffi
u 2
X
X 2m þ 2
j
u 4l p 2 22mþ2
2m
2m
2mþ2
u
u s0 2 st þ s0 2mþ2 hb3 2m s1 f1 ði 1Þ!! ðj 1Þ!!
i 2mi p 2mþ2j
st tp
u i¼0;i¼even
i j¼0;j¼even
j
u "
X
#2
u Xmþ1
m þ 1 p j mþ1j
m
u 2mþ1 m
u s1 f1 ði 1Þ!!
i mi
st t p ðj 1Þ!!
¼u u j¼0;j¼even

X
Xmþ2
u m þ 2 p j mþ2j
mþ2 m
u þ2 2 l m
s1 f1 ði 1Þ!!
i mi
st tp ðj 1Þ!!
u j¼0;j¼even
u
X
mþ1
u mþ2 m X m þ 1 p j mþ1j
t 2 2 ltp m
s1 f1 ði 1Þ!!
i mi
st tp ðj 1Þ!!
j
DOI: 10.1002/atr

A Reliability-Based Traf Fic Assignment Model For Multi-Modal Transport Network Under Demand Uncertainty

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

A Reliability-Based Traf Fic Assignment Model For Multi-Modal Transport Network Under Demand Uncertainty

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

A Reliability-Based Traf Fic Assignment Model For Multi-Modal Transport Network Under Demand Uncertainty

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

JOURNAL OF ADVANCED TRANSPORTATION

J. Adv. Transp. 2014; 48:66–85

A reliability-based trafﬁc assignment model for multi-modal

Xiao Fu*, William H. K. Lam and Bi Yu Chen

Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

2. MODEL ASSUMPTIONS AND NETWORK REPRESENTATION

2.1. Model assumptions

2.2. Multi-modal transport network

3. FORMULATION OF PASSENGER FLOW AND TRAVEL TIME DISTRIBUTIONS

3.1. Passenger ﬂow distribution

Qrs ¼ qrs þ e; (1)

3.2. Link travel time distribution

3.2.1. Physical links

2k1 b2 tv0 Xk1

u 2k1 b2 tv0 X2k1 X 2k1

u ðg2 Þ2 tv0 2k2

3.2.2. In-vehicle links

3.2.3. Transfer links

However, when travelers transfer to b3 (bus), Gb (i.e., Gb 3 ) is stochastic as formulated in Section

3.3. Route travel time distribution

4. MODEL FORMULATION AND SOLUTION ALGORITHM

4.1. Model formulation

4.2. Solution algorithm

Figure 1. The multi-modal network.

Table I. Feasible routes according to probable transfer states.

Table II. Non-linear fares of the subway.

Table III. Non-linear fares of the bus.

1.25E-01 8864 9364 9864

*Relative Gap = GAP / ∑ fp p

Figure 2. Convergence characteristics of the solution algorithm.

% Percentage of modal split (bus)

560 Transfer No Transfer 2640

Route passenger flow

7. LISTS OF SYMBOLS AND ABBREVIATIONS

RSUE reliability-based stochastic user equilibrium

b1, k1 model parameters in Equation (23)

M multi-modal transport network; M = (U, V)

F at passenger ﬂow on transfer link at

Substituting Equation (29) in Equation (36) gives the following equation

2k1 b2 tv0 X2k1

! tv ¼ E ½A1 þ E ½A2 þ E ½A3

u 2k1 b2 tv0 X2k1 X 2k1

According to the MathWorld website [28], it follows that

With similar manipulations, the following equations can be obtained.

2mþ1 m i mi mþ1 j mþ1j

tat ¼ E ½Tat ¼ E ½I1 þ E ½I2

You might also like