pith. sign in

arxiv: 2605.22726 · v1 · pith:FDKMPAS4new · submitted 2026-05-21 · 📡 eess.SY · cs.SY

Dynamic Lane Allocation in UAM Corridors for Efficient Multimodal Door-to-Door Mobility

Jung Ho Park , Jordan Kam , Vishwanath Bulusu , Alexandre Bayen , Raja Sengupta This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-22 03:39 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 📡 eess.SY cs.SY
keywords urban air mobilitydynamic lane allocationmixed-integer linear programmingmultimodal mobilityairspace utilizationvertiport dispatchSan Francisco Bay Areadoor-to-door travel
0
0 comments X

The pith

Dynamic directional lane allocation in UAM corridors cuts unused airspace capacity by 5x and reduces mean travel time by up to 21.6 percent.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

This paper establishes that treating UAM corridor lane directions as a discrete-time mixed-integer linear program allows lanes to activate, deactivate, and reverse as bi-directional demand changes over time. A sympathetic reader would care because static lane designs in urban air mobility leave much of the allocated airspace idle, limiting how well UAM can serve as part of door-to-door multimodal trips. The authors derive demand by breaking down actual ground trips in the San Francisco Bay Area into first-, middle-, and last-mile segments and routing the middle-mile portion through a vertiport dispatch model, then show concrete efficiency gains on a corridor between Contra Costa County and Silicon Valley.

Core claim

The paper claims that a discrete-time mixed-integer linear program can dynamically configure directional lanes in a UAM corridor by activating, deactivating, and reversing them in response to evolving bi-directional airspace demand. When demand is obtained by decomposing multimodal trips from disaggregate ground travel data and routing the UAM middle-mile leg through a vertiport-side dispatch model, the dynamic policy applied to a Bay Area corridor reduces unused airspace capacity by a factor of five, raises mean lane utilization from 36-48 percent to 67 percent at the same service level, and lowers mean travel time for the commuting population by as much as 21.6 percent.

What carries the argument

A discrete-time mixed-integer linear program that optimizes activation, deactivation, and reversal of UAM lane directions as bi-directional demand evolves from multimodal trip decompositions.

If this is right

  • Mean lane utilization rises to 67 percent from the 36-48 percent range of static baselines while holding service level constant.
  • Unused airspace capacity falls by a factor of five relative to fixed lane allocations.
  • Commuting-population mean travel time drops by up to 21.6 percent.
  • Dynamic configuration supplies a safe, structural method to raise throughput in lane-based UAM airspace.
  • UAM becomes a more viable complement to existing multimodal door-to-door mobility systems.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The same optimization structure could be tested on reversible lanes in ground transportation networks such as highways during peak periods.
  • Adding short-term demand forecasting to the MILP inputs might further improve utilization gains beyond the reported figures.
  • Airspace regulators may need to define safety standards that accommodate frequent lane direction changes if dynamic allocation is adopted at scale.

Load-bearing premise

Demand is accurately obtained by decomposing each trip into first-, middle-, and last-mile legs and routing the UAM middle-mile segment through a vertiport-side dispatch model using disaggregate ground travel data for the San Francisco Bay Area.

What would settle it

A simulation or pilot implementation on the same Bay Area corridor that shows no reduction in unused capacity or travel time when the dynamic MILP policy is applied to the modeled demand patterns would falsify the central claim.

read the original abstract

This article presents dynamic directional lane allocation in urban air mobility (UAM) corridors as a discrete-time mixed-integer linear program (MILP). This formulation activates, deactivates, and reverses lane direction as bi-directional airspace demand evolves. We model demand from disaggregate ground travel data by decomposing each trip into a multi-modal sequence with first-, middle-, and last-mile legs and routing the UAM-served middle-mile segment through a vertiport-side dispatch model. We use the San Francisco Bay Area as a case study by placing a multi-region spanning corridor between Contra Costa county and Silicon Valley. We find that the dynamic policy cuts unused airspace capacity by 5x, increases mean lane utilization from 36-48% to 67% at the same service level relative to baselines, and reduces commuting-population mean travel time by up to 21.6%. These results show that dynamic configuration of airspace capacity alleviates a significant percentage of the under-utilization issue of lane-based UAM airspace design and UAM concept of operations. This dynamic allocation also provides a safe, structural way to increase throughput, making UAM a more viable complement to multimodal door-to-door mobility systems.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

1 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper formulates dynamic directional lane allocation in UAM corridors as a discrete-time MILP that activates, deactivates, and reverses lanes in response to evolving bi-directional airspace demand. Demand is generated by decomposing disaggregate ground-travel trips from the San Francisco Bay Area into first-, middle-, and last-mile legs and routing the UAM middle-mile segment through a vertiport-side dispatch model. A case study places a multi-region corridor between Contra Costa County and Silicon Valley; the dynamic policy is reported to reduce unused airspace capacity by a factor of 5, raise mean lane utilization from 36-48% to 67% at fixed service level, and cut mean commuting travel time by up to 21.6% relative to static baselines.

Significance. If the demand model is shown to be robust, the work provides a concrete optimization framework for real-time reconfiguration of lane-based UAM airspace that directly targets under-utilization while preserving safety margins. The use of disaggregate ground data and a standard MILP solver gives the results immediate practical relevance for corridor-scale UAM operations and multimodal integration.

major comments (1)
  1. [§3-4] §3-4: Demand is constructed by decomposing ground trips into multimodal legs and routing the UAM middle-mile via a vertiport dispatch model, treating the eligible fraction and its spatiotemporal pattern as fixed and exogenous. No logit or nested mode-choice layer (incorporating time, cost, safety, or vertiport-access penalties) is applied. Because the headline quantitative claims (5× unused-capacity reduction, 36-48% → 67% utilization, 21.6% travel-time reduction) rest directly on this demand volume and pattern, the absence of sensitivity analysis on UAM adoption rates or a calibrated choice model is load-bearing; lower or differently peaked adoption would shrink the reported gains and invalidate the “same service level” comparison to static baselines.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract and §5: The phrase “cuts unused airspace capacity by 5x” should be accompanied by an explicit definition of the unused-capacity metric and the precise baseline against which the factor is computed.
  2. [Results] Results section: The reported utilization and travel-time figures lack error bars, standard deviations, or sensitivity checks on the demand-decomposition parameters; adding these would clarify robustness without altering the central formulation.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive feedback and positive assessment of the work's practical relevance. We address the major comment on demand modeling below and outline revisions to improve robustness.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [§3-4] §3-4: Demand is constructed by decomposing ground trips into multimodal legs and routing the UAM middle-mile via a vertiport dispatch model, treating the eligible fraction and its spatiotemporal pattern as fixed and exogenous. No logit or nested mode-choice layer (incorporating time, cost, safety, or vertiport-access penalties) is applied. Because the headline quantitative claims (5× unused-capacity reduction, 36-48% → 67% utilization, 21.6% travel-time reduction) rest directly on this demand volume and pattern, the absence of sensitivity analysis on UAM adoption rates or a calibrated choice model is load-bearing; lower or differently peaked adoption would shrink the reported gains and invalidate the “same service level” comparison to static baselines.

    Authors: We thank the referee for this observation. Our demand construction relies on disaggregate ground-travel trips from the San Francisco Bay Area, decomposed into first-, middle-, and last-mile legs with the UAM segment routed through a vertiport dispatch model. This yields a fixed, data-driven spatiotemporal pattern for eligible trips without an explicit mode-choice layer, consistent with the manuscript's focus on the MILP-based dynamic lane allocation for a given demand scenario. We agree that the headline metrics depend on the assumed demand volume and that the absence of sensitivity analysis on adoption rates is a limitation. In the revised manuscript we will add a sensitivity study varying the UAM adoption fraction (e.g., 5–20 %) and re-evaluate utilization, unused capacity, and travel-time reductions under scaled demand, including checks for differently peaked patterns. This will clarify how the dynamic policy benefits scale while preserving the same service-level comparison to static baselines. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: results obtained by solving MILP on external ground-travel dataset

full rationale

The paper formulates dynamic lane allocation as a discrete-time MILP, constructs demand by decomposing trips from an external disaggregate San Francisco Bay Area ground-travel dataset into first/middle/last-mile legs, and reports utilization and travel-time improvements by solving the resulting optimization instance. No equation reduces a claimed prediction to a fitted parameter by construction, no uniqueness theorem is imported from self-citation, and the central performance numbers are not statistically forced by internal fitting. The derivation is therefore self-contained against the external benchmark data and standard solver.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on standard MILP solvability and the accuracy of the trip-decomposition demand model drawn from ground data; no new entities are postulated.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Ground travel data can be decomposed into accurate first-, middle-, and last-mile legs for UAM routing
    Invoked to generate UAM demand from disaggregate ground travel records in the Bay Area case study.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5755 in / 1216 out tokens · 49244 ms · 2026-05-22T03:39:57.556733+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

37 extracted references · 37 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    An outline of a Concept of Operations for integration of ATM and air transport into multimodal transport system for Door-to-Door travel,

    Di Vito, V., Montaquila, R. V., Cerasuolo, G., Dziugieł, B., Maczka, M., Mazur, A., Meincke, P. A., Naser, F., Mota, M. M., Bagamanova, M., et al., “An outline of a Concept of Operations for integration of ATM and air transport into multimodal transport system for Door-to-Door travel,”2022 Integrated Communication, Navigation and Surveillance Conference (...

    work page 2022

  2. [2]

    Travel time and distance as relative accessibility in the journey to work,

    Niedzielski, M. A., and Eric Boschmann, E., “Travel time and distance as relative accessibility in the journey to work,”Annals of the association of American Geographers, Vol. 104, No. 6, 2014, pp. 1156–1182

    work page 2014

  3. [3]

    Urban air mobility (UAM) market study,

    Goyal, R., Reiche, C., Fernando, C., Serrao, J., Kimmel, S., Cohen, A., and Shaheen, S., “Urban air mobility (UAM) market study,” Tech. rep., 2018

    work page 2018

  4. [4]

    Operational Air Taxi Flight Routes in a Metropolitan Region,

    Kam, J. K., Casanova, M., Bulusu, V., Bayen, A., and Sengupta, R., “Operational Air Taxi Flight Routes in a Metropolitan Region,”AIAA AVIATION FORUM AND ASCEND 2025, 2025, p. 3240

    work page 2025

  5. [5]

    Passenger-Oriented Total Mobility Using Digital Engineering (PAX Mobility): Opportunity Concept Report (OCR),

    Idris, H., Wagner, D., Slizik, M., and Glenn-Chase, A., “Passenger-Oriented Total Mobility Using Digital Engineering (PAX Mobility): Opportunity Concept Report (OCR),” 2024

    work page 2024

  6. [6]

    Scalingconstraintsforurbanairmobilityoperations: Airtrafficcontrol,groundinfrastructure, and noise,

    Vascik,P.D.,andHansman,R.J.,“Scalingconstraintsforurbanairmobilityoperations: Airtrafficcontrol,groundinfrastructure, and noise,”2018 aviation technology, integration, and operations conference, 2018, p. 3849

    work page 2018

  7. [7]

    Urban Air Mobility (UAM) Concept of Operations, Version 2.0,

    Federal Aviation Administration, “Urban Air Mobility (UAM) Concept of Operations, Version 2.0,” Tech. rep., Federal Aviation Administration, Washington, DC, 2023. URLhttps://www.faa.gov/sites/faa.gov/files/Urban%20Air% 20Mobility%20%28UAM%29%20Concept%20of%20Operations%202.0_1.pdf

    work page 2023

  8. [8]

    Provider of Services for Urban Air Mobility (PSU) Prototype Simulation (X5) Final Report,

    Lee, H., Lee, A. G., Seah, C. H., Lee, C. H., and Moolchandani, K., “Provider of Services for Urban Air Mobility (PSU) Prototype Simulation (X5) Final Report,” Tech. Rep. NASA/TM-20250001367, NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA, Feb. 2025. URLhttps://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20250001367. 14

    work page arXiv 2025

  9. [9]

    A Flight Simulator Software for Visualization of 3-Dimensional Airspaces and Air Traffic Management,

    Su, W., Kam, J., and Bulusu, D. V., “A Flight Simulator Software for Visualization of 3-Dimensional Airspaces and Air Traffic Management,”2025 Regional Student Conferences, 2025, p. 97940

    work page 2025

  10. [10]

    A Review on Airspace Design and Risk Assessment for Urban Air Mobility,

    Yang, J., Wang, Y., Hang, X., and Delahaye, D., “A Review on Airspace Design and Risk Assessment for Urban Air Mobility,” IEEE Access, Vol. 12, 2024, pp. 157599–157611. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2024.3481148

    work page doi:10.1109/access.2024.3481148 2024

  11. [11]

    FAA-NASA vs. lane-based strategic deconfliction,

    Sacharny, D., Henderson, T. C., Cline, M., Russon, B., and Guo, E., “FAA-NASA vs. lane-based strategic deconfliction,”2020 IEEE International Conference on Multisensor Fusion and Integration for Intelligent Systems (MFI), IEEE, 2020, pp. 13–18

    work page 2020

  12. [12]

    Multi-modal Air Trajectory Traffic,

    Henderson, T. C., Marston, V., and Sacharny, D., “Multi-modal Air Trajectory Traffic,”Intelligent Autonomous Systems 18: Volume 2 Proceedings of the 18th International Conference IAS18-2023, Springer Nature, 2024, p. 247

    work page 2023

  13. [13]

    Lane-Based Large-Scale UAS Traffic Management,

    Sacharny, D., Henderson, T. C., and Marston, V. V., “Lane-Based Large-Scale UAS Traffic Management,”IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems, Vol. 23, No. 10, 2022, pp. 18835–18844. https://doi.org/10.1109/TITS.2022.3160378

    work page doi:10.1109/tits.2022.3160378 2022

  14. [14]

    Hybrid AI-Based Demand-Capacity Balancing for UAS Traffic Management and Urban Air Mobility,

    Xie, Y., Gardi, A., and Sabatini, R., “Hybrid AI-Based Demand-Capacity Balancing for UAS Traffic Management and Urban Air Mobility,” 2021. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2021-2325

    work page doi:10.2514/6.2021-2325 2021

  15. [15]

    AI-basedDynamicRe-routingforDenseLow-AltitudeAirTrafficManagement,

    Xie,Y.,Gardi,A.,Liang,M.,andSabatini,R.,“AI-basedDynamicRe-routingforDenseLow-AltitudeAirTrafficManagement,” 2023 IEEE/AIAA 42nd Digital Avionics Systems Conference (DASC), 2023, pp. 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1109/DASC58513. 2023.10311237

    work page doi:10.1109/dasc58513 2023

  16. [16]

    AframeworkforcollaborativeUAMtrafficflowoptimizationwith mission preferences: Incorporating customized strategy synergy into strategic conflict management,

    Du,S.,Zhong,G.,Wang,F.,Wu,L.,Zhang,H.,andXue,D.,“AframeworkforcollaborativeUAMtrafficflowoptimizationwith mission preferences: Incorporating customized strategy synergy into strategic conflict management,”Transportation Research PartE:LogisticsandTransportationReview,Vol.202,2025,p.104326.https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tre.2025.104326, URL http...

    work page doi:10.1016/j.tre.2025.104326 2025

  17. [17]

    Optimization-GuidedExplorationofAdvancedAirMobilityCongestion Management Strategies with Stochastic Demands,

    Wu,H.,Weitz,L.A.,Henderson,J.M.,andLi,M.Z.,“Optimization-GuidedExplorationofAdvancedAirMobilityCongestion Management Strategies with Stochastic Demands,” , 2025. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2509.18505

    work page arXiv 2025

  18. [18]

    Centralized and distributed optimization of advanced air mobility strategic traffic management,

    Kim, J., Li, M. Z., Atkins, E. M., Franzini, G., Wadhwani, K., and Riverso, S., “Centralized and distributed optimization of advanced air mobility strategic traffic management,”Drone Systems and Applications, Vol. 14, 2026, pp. 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1139/dsa-2025-0020, URL https://doi.org/10.1139/dsa-2025-0020

    work page doi:10.1139/dsa-2025-0020 2026

  19. [19]

    Conceptual Framework for Dynamic Optimal Airspace Configuration for Urban Air Mobility,

    Hearn, T., Kotwicz Herniczek, M., and German, B., “Conceptual Framework for Dynamic Optimal Airspace Configuration for Urban Air Mobility,”Journal of Air Transportation, Vol. 31, 2023, pp. 1–15. https://doi.org/10.2514/1.D0327

    work page doi:10.2514/1.d0327 2023

  20. [20]

    An Integrated Approach for On-Demand Dynamic Capacity Management Service in U-Space,

    Tang, Y., Xu, Y., and Inalhan, G., “An Integrated Approach for On-Demand Dynamic Capacity Management Service in U-Space,”IEEE Transactions on Aerospace and Electronic Systems, Vol. 58, No. 5, 2022, pp. 4180–4195. https: //doi.org/10.1109/TAES.2022.3159317

    work page doi:10.1109/taes.2022.3159317 2022

  21. [21]

    A Decentralized Coordination Scheme for Dynamic Capacity Management in Urban Air Mobility,

    Tang, Y., Xu, Y., and Inalhan, G., “A Decentralized Coordination Scheme for Dynamic Capacity Management in Urban Air Mobility,”IEEE Transactions on Aerospace and Electronic Systems, Vol. 61, No. 6, 2025, pp. 18471–18488. https: //doi.org/10.1109/TAES.2025.3614212

    work page doi:10.1109/taes.2025.3614212 2025

  22. [22]

    JointSupply-DemandControlofUrbanAirMobility Operations with Variable Pricing: A Case Study of Airport Access Market at JFK,

    Cao,A.,Park,J.,Duarte,J.,Srinivasan,R.,Sengupta,R.,andHansen,M.,“JointSupply-DemandControlofUrbanAirMobility Operations with Variable Pricing: A Case Study of Airport Access Market at JFK,” 2026. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.6521194, submitted for publication

    work page doi:10.2139/ssrn.6521194 2026

  23. [23]

    Seasonal Trip Tables for California,

    Replica, “Seasonal Trip Tables for California,” Replica Mobility Model, 2026. Modeled, synthetic dataset. Accessed via https://documentation.replicahq.com/docs/disaggregate-trip-tables

    work page 2026

  24. [24]

    2009, 2009

    Train, K.,Discrete Choice Methods With Simulation, Vol. 2009, 2009. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511805271

    work page doi:10.1017/cbo9780511805271 2009

  25. [25]

    Exploring Preferences for Transportation Modes in an Urban Air Mobility Environment: Munich Case Study,

    Fu, M., Rothfeld, R., and Antoniou, C., “Exploring Preferences for Transportation Modes in an Urban Air Mobility Environment: Munich Case Study,”Transportation Research Record, Vol. 2673, No. 10, 2019, pp. 427–442. https: //doi.org/10.1177/0361198119843858, URL https://doi.org/10.1177/0361198119843858

    work page doi:10.1177/0361198119843858 2019

  26. [26]

    F., Balać, M., and Axhausen, K

    Ilahi, A., Belgiawan, P. F., Balać, M., and Axhausen, K. W.,9th Symposium of the European Association for Research in Transportation (hEART 2020), European Association for Research in Transportation, 2020

    work page 2020

  27. [27]

    Urban Air Mobility Fleet Management Under Uncertainty: A Deep Reinforcement Learning Approach,

    Onat, E., Cao, A., Sengupta, R., and Hansen, M., “Urban Air Mobility Fleet Management Under Uncertainty: A Deep Reinforcement Learning Approach,” 2024. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.5072017. 15

    work page doi:10.2139/ssrn.5072017 2024

  28. [28]

    A Concept of Airspace Configuration and Operational Rules for UAS in Current Airspace,

    Pang, B., Dai, W., Ra, T., and Low, K. H., “A Concept of Airspace Configuration and Operational Rules for UAS in Current Airspace,”2020 AIAA/IEEE 39th Digital Avionics Systems Conference (DASC), 2020, pp. 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1109/ DASC50938.2020.9256627

    work page arXiv 2020

  29. [29]

    Metropolis: Relating Airspace Structure and Capacity for Extreme Traffic Densities,

    Sunil, E., Hoekstra, J., Ellerbroek, J., Bussink, F., Nieuwenhuisen, D., Vidosavljevic, A., and Kern, S., “Metropolis: Relating Airspace Structure and Capacity for Extreme Traffic Densities,”Proceedings of the 11th USA/Europe Air Traffic Management Research and Development Seminar, Lisbon, Portugal, 2015

    work page 2015

  30. [30]

    A Safety Evaluation of Vertical Separation for Multi-rotor eVTOL Based on an Improved Event Model,

    Wang, X., and Wang, Y., “A Safety Evaluation of Vertical Separation for Multi-rotor eVTOL Based on an Improved Event Model,”Journal of Transport Information and Safety, Vol. 42, No. 1, 2024, pp. 19–27. https://doi.org/10.3963/j.jssn.1674- 4861.2024.01.003

    work page doi:10.3963/j.jssn.1674- 2024

  31. [31]

    Designing Airspace for Urban Air Mobility: A Review of Concepts and Approaches,

    Bauranov, A., and Rakas, J., “Designing Airspace for Urban Air Mobility: A Review of Concepts and Approaches,”Progress in Aerospace Sciences, Vol. 125, 2021, p. 100726. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paerosci.2021.100726

    work page doi:10.1016/j.paerosci.2021.100726 2021

  32. [32]

    Initial Concepts for Dynamic Airspace Configuration,

    Kopardekar, P., Bilimoria, K., and Sridhar, B., “Initial Concepts for Dynamic Airspace Configuration,”7th AIAA Aviation Technology, Integration, and Operations Conference (ATIO), Belfast, Northern Ireland, 2007. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2007- 7763

    work page doi:10.2514/6.2007- 2007

  33. [33]

    Algorithms for Combining Airspace Sectors,

    Bloem, M., Kopardekar, P., and Gupta, P., “Algorithms for Combining Airspace Sectors,”Air Traffic Control Quarterly, Vol. 17, No. 3, 2009, pp. 245–268. https://doi.org/10.2514/atcq.17.3.245

    work page doi:10.2514/atcq.17.3.245 2009

  34. [34]

    An Efficient Method for Airspace Analysis and Partitioning Based on Equalized Traffic Mass,

    Klein, A., “An Efficient Method for Airspace Analysis and Partitioning Based on Equalized Traffic Mass,”6th USA/Europe Air Traffic Management Research and Development Seminar, Baltimore, MD, 2005

    work page 2005

  35. [35]

    Forecasting Workload and Airspace Configuration with Neural Networks and Tree Search Methods,

    Gianazza, D., “Forecasting Workload and Airspace Configuration with Neural Networks and Tree Search Methods,”Artificial Intelligence, Vol. 174, No. 7, 2010, pp. 530–549. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.artint.2010.03.001

    work page doi:10.1016/j.artint.2010.03.001 2010

  36. [36]

    UCAirLink: A Vertical Takeoff and Landing-Based Air Transportation System for Optimizing Commuter Efficiency,

    Rubi, L. R., Kam, J., Luo, R., Yang, J., Zheng, X., Zou, E., Wang, T.-H., and Mueller, M., “UCAirLink: A Vertical Takeoff and Landing-Based Air Transportation System for Optimizing Commuter Efficiency,”Vertical Flight Society 81st Annual Forum and Technology Display, The Vertical Flight Society, 2025

    work page 2025

  37. [37]

    Evaluating eVTOL Network Performance and Fleet Dynamics through Simulation-Based Analysis,

    Onat, E., Bulusu, V., Chakrabarty, A., Hansen, M., Sengupta, R., and Sridhar, B., “Evaluating eVTOL Network Performance and Fleet Dynamics through Simulation-Based Analysis,” 2024. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2024-0336. 16

    work page doi:10.2514/6.2024-0336 2024