Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 41 references

Line planning under crowding: A cut-and-column generation approach

T0 review · 3 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-10 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read Crowding-aware line planning can cut metro crowding at modest travel-time cost.

desk verdict Sound MI-SOCP cut-and-column method for line planning with crowding, but the near-optimality claims in the computational study outrun the reported bounds. read the letter →

arxiv 2501.13819 v1 pith:BBTOIKQX submitted 2025-01-23 math.OC

Yahan Lu , Rolf N. van Lieshout , Layla Martin , Lixing Yang This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.OC MSC 90C1190B0690B2090C35
keywords lineplanningcrowdingeffectsmixed-integersecond-orderconeprogrammingcut-and-columngenerationcolumnchange-and-gonetworkuserequilibriumBeijingmetro
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

This paper seeks to establish that line planning for a metro network can explicitly price passenger crowding, treating discomfort as a penalty that grows with the square of passenger flow on an arc and shrinks with the frequency of the serving line, and that the resulting optimization problem can be solved at full network scale. The authors reformulate the nonlinear objective as a mixed-integer second-order cone program and solve it with a cut-and-column generation scheme that generates passenger routes on the fly and adds tangent cuts for the crowding cones. On the Beijing metro network, with 534 candidate lines and 56,916 origin-destination pairs, the resulting line plans reduce crowding and cut perceived travel time compared with the existing plan while increasing actual travel time by a modest margin. They also show that passenger self-routing under a user-equilibrium condition stays close to the system-optimal routing, so ignoring selfish route choice during optimization loses little.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the perceived crowding penalty gamma_a $x_a^{2}$ / y_l(a), combined with the rotated second-order cone constraint Theta_a y_l(a) >= gamma_a $x_a^{2}$. The quadratic-over-linear form makes passenger-flow interactions convex, which is what allows the nonlinear line planning model to be recast as a mixed-integer second-order cone program; the cone constraints are then approximated by linear tangent cuts, and passenger routes are priced dynamically as shortest paths in the change-and-go network. This combination lets the algorithm keep the master problem small while still searching the enormous space of possible routes and handling the crowding nonlinearity.

What would settle it

Collect stated-preference data on how much extra travel time passengers would accept to avoid a train that is 10% or 50% fuller, and fit a marginal crowding cost as a function of load factor. If that fitted function is not approximately linear in x_a divided by y_l(a) (for example, if discomfort saturates after seating is full), re-solving the Beijing sub-network instance with the fitted curve should change the chosen line frequencies; if it does, the reported crowding-reduction and travel-time trade-off is tied to the quadratic-over-linear assumption.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that a quadratic-over-linear crowding term gamma_a $x_a^{2}$ / y_l(a) inserted into the objective of the line planning problem is enough to make crowd-avoiding line plans emerge from a tractable optimization model. On each arc, x_a is the number of passengers using the arc and y_l(a) is the frequency of the line that serves it, so the penalty rises steeply with passenger load and falls as trains arrive more often. The authors show that this term fits into a rotated second-order cone constraint Theta_a y_l(a) >= gamma_a $x_a^{2}$, giving a mixed-integer second-order cone program in which the nonlinearity can be handled by first-order tangent cuts. Their column generation prices passenger routes as shortest paths in the change-and-go network, so the route set does not need to be enumerated. On the 5x5 grid benchmark the best variant of the algorithm reaches an average optimality gap near 1.8% in far less time than a commercial solver, and on the Beijing metro it produces line plans whose perceived travel time beats the real-world plan by 4.6% to 7.5% on the central sub-network while shifting the distribution of crowding downward; the system-optimal and user-equilibrium objective values differ by at most 0.07% on the grid and 0.64% on the Beijing sub-network.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that a passenger's discomfort on a train segment is exactly a fixed factor times the square of the number of passengers on that segment divided by the train frequency, and that passengers choose routes to minimize ride time plus that discomfort.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Operators can reduce the most crowded sections of a metro network without building new tracks, by rebalancing which lines run and at what frequencies within the existing budget.
  • A single system-optimal routing model is enough for planning purposes: the user-equilibrium routing is so close that a bi-level model with selfish passengers would add little.
  • Large real-world networks are within reach of this approach: the full Beijing experiment has hundreds of stations, 534 candidate lines, and 56,916 origin-destination pairs, and crowding-aware instances complete in hours to a few days of compute time.
  • The crowding factor is not just a modeling detail: raising it shifts the optimal plan toward fewer lines running at higher frequencies, so the model quantifies the frequency-versus-coverage trade-off.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Beyond the paper: replacing the quadratic-over-linear penalty with a piecewise-linear crowding curve that saturates at standing capacity or distinguishes seated from standing passengers would directly test whether the reported crowding reductions depend on the exact shape of the penalty.
  • Beyond the paper: because the user-equilibrium evaluation uses the same crowding function that generated the line plan, the small system-optimal versus user-equilibrium gap may partly reflect self-consistency of the model; a stated-preference calibration of the crowding factor would be needed to confirm the gap in practice.
  • Beyond the paper: feeding time-sliced origin-destination matrices into the same cut-and-column machinery would extend the static analysis to peak-hour spreading, where holding line frequencies fixed across periods could change the best crowding-aware plan.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper studies line planning under passenger crowding. It models perceived travel cost as in-vehicle time plus a quadratic-over-linear crowding penalty γ_a x_a^2 / y_ℓ, reformulates the resulting mixed-integer nonlinear program as an MI-SOCP (Formulation 2), and solves it with a cut-and-column generation framework comprising three algorithmic variants and a diving heuristic. Experiments on a 5×5 grid network and on the Beijing metro network (central sub-network and full network) are used to claim near-optimal solutions within short computation times and to derive insights about crowding reduction, travel-time tradeoffs, and the closeness of system-optimal and user-equilibrium routings.

Significance. The mathematical core of the paper is sound: the rotated second-order cone reformulation is valid, Proposition 1's tangent cut follows from convexity of x^2/y on y > 0, and the user-equilibrium evaluation via the convex potential in Section 5 is standard. The Beijing case study is a substantial computational effort involving tens of thousands of OD pairs and hundreds of candidate lines, and the paper gives credit for a practical, scalable algorithmic framework if the optimality claims can be supported. However, the empirical evidence for the central 'near-system-optimal' claim is currently incomplete: the grid benchmarks are restricted to 15 routes per OD pair, and the full-network experiments report no objective values or lower bounds. With additional bounds or appropriately qualified claims, the contribution would be a useful practical method for nonlinear line planning.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 6.2, Table 2 and Figure 4] The statement 'Since we use the optimal solutions obtained by GUROBI as the benchmark, the relative gaps are true optimality gaps' is not correct. The GUROBI benchmark solves Formulation (2) with at most 15 pre-specified PTN routes per OD pair. Because this is a restricted minimization, its optimal value is an upper bound on the true optimum, and the difference between the FCTP objective and this restricted optimum is only a lower bound on the true optimality gap. Figure 4 shows the objective still decreasing between 10 and 15 routes, so saturation at 15 routes is not established. The reported 1.77% average gap should be described as a gap to a restricted route set, or supplemented with a valid lower bound such as an LP/SOCP relaxation bound or an unrestricted column-generation bound.
  2. [Section 6.4, Table 3] The full-network scalability experiments report only computational times, iteration counts, and average RMP/PP times; no objective values or lower bounds are given. Consequently, the claims that the algorithm 'effectively scales to large-scale instances' and produces near-system-optimal solutions for the entire Beijing network are not supported by the reported evidence. This is especially consequential because the text states that for crowding factors 0.005 and 0.008 the diving heuristic has difficulty finding good solutions, resulting in solutions with more crowding. Please report objective values and at least one bound, or clearly label the outputs as heuristic without optimality claims.
  3. [Section 6.3, Insight 2 and Figure 8] The benchmark definition for Insight 2 is ambiguous and should be clarified. As written, the text says the benchmark 'inputs the optimized line plan under crowding effects into Formulation (1) with γ_a set to zero' and then states that each point compares perceived travel costs 'with and without crowding effects under the same line plan.' These two descriptions are difficult to reconcile with the reported direction of the APTT reduction. If the comparison is between a plan optimized with crowding and one optimized without crowding, please state this explicitly and describe how passenger routing is recomputed in each case; if it is truly the same line plan with and without the crowding penalty, the reported APTT reduction needs a different explanation.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Throughout] Several figure cross-references are missing or appear as 'Figure ??' (e.g., in Section 3 for the CGN example and in Section 6.2 for the route-count experiment). Please fix all cross-references and verify the final PDF rendering.
  2. [Section 6.3, Insight 2] The abbreviations APTT and ATT are used before they are formally defined; please define them at first use and make the units (minutes or percentages) explicit.
  3. [Section 3, Eq. (1a)] The crowding penalty γ_a x_a^2 / y_ℓ is an uncalibrated modeling assumption. The paper should acknowledge explicitly that the quantitative magnitudes of the insights depend on this functional form and on the chosen γ_a values.
  4. [Conclusion] The conclusion states an 'average optimality gap ranging from 1.8% to 3.5%', while Section 6.2 reports an average FCTP gap of 1.77% and individual gaps up to about 5%. These numbers should be made consistent and tied to the specific algorithm variants.
  5. [Section 4.4 and 6.1] The algorithm parameters Δ1, Δ2, I, and ε are chosen based on preliminary experiments, but no sensitivity analysis or guidance on their selection is given. A brief discussion of robustness to these tuning parameters would strengthen the computational study.
  6. [Section 3] The notation R_a, R_p, R_p^a is introduced but is not always used consistently afterward. A compact notation table or a short explanation of the difference between PTN routes and CGN routes would improve readability.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the SOCP reformulation, cut-and-column generation, and user-equilibrium evaluation follow from stated assumptions and independent external results; the crowding-reduction insight is a model consequence, not a disguised prediction, though several optimality-gap claims in §6.2 and §6.4 are not fully supported by the reported benchmarks.

full rationale

The derivation chain is not circular. Formulation (1) is a stated MINLP model whose objective (1a) includes the crowding penalty γa x_a^2 / y_ℓ(a); Formulation (2) is an exact epigraph SOCP reformulation with auxiliary Θa variables and rotated cone constraints (2c), so no fitted quantity is re-introduced as a prediction. Proposition 1's cut-validity proof uses convexity of x^2/y and is self-contained. Column generation (Section 4.3) is standard reduced-cost pricing against duals of (2f)–(2g). The user-equilibrium evaluation (Section 5) solves a genuinely different optimization problem (4) based on Wardrop's first principle and the external potential-function result from Roughgarden (2007) for a fixed line plan, so the system-optimal versus user-equilibrium comparison carries independent content. Self-citations (e.g., Lu et al. 2022, 2023; Van Lieshout et al. 2020) appear only as literature context or for standard assumptions such as a pre-defined line pool; none is load-bearing, and no author-uniqueness theorem is invoked to forbid alternatives. The crowding penalty itself is an assumption, not derived, and Insight 1's finding that larger crowding factors produce less crowding is an analytic consequence of placing that penalty in the minimized objective; the paper does not present this as an external empirical prediction, so it is not a circular step under the review criteria. Two validity concerns, distinct from circularity, should be noted: Section 6.2 states 'Since we use the optimal solutions obtained by GUROBI as the benchmark, the relative gaps are true optimality gaps,' but the GUROBI benchmark solves Formulation (2) with at most 15 PTN routes per OD pair, so its optimal value is only an upper bound on the true optimum and the reported gaps are at best lower bounds on true gaps; and Section 6.4, Table 3 reports only computational times for the full Beijing network, with no objective values or lower bounds, so 'near-system-optimal' scaling is not demonstrated there. These are evidence-quality limitations, not circular reasoning. Overall, the paper's main derivation chain is self-contained and non-circular, so the circularity score is 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 6 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on a paper-specific crowding penalty functional form, fixed demand, a pre-defined line pool, and hand-set cost and penalty parameters. No new physical entities are introduced. The optimization method itself is standard in structure, so the main burden is the empirical validity of the crowding function and the instance parameters, plus the tuning of algorithm thresholds.

free parameters (6)
  • Crowding factor gamma_a = 0.001 to 0.2 depending on instance
    Chosen by sensitivity analysis, not estimated from passenger data. It sets the relative weight of crowding in perceived travel time and drives the main managerial insights.
  • Transfer penalty = 5 minutes on grid, 15 minutes on Beijing
    Hand-set model parameter that strongly affects route choice and the system-optimal versus user-equilibrium comparison.
  • Line set-up cost factor e_l = 1.5 times operational cost on grid; 20, 30, or 40 on Beijing
    Varied across experiments rather than taken from a cost model; the number of operated lines and the crowding distribution depend on this parameter.
  • Maximum frequency f_max = 5 trains per hour on grid; 40 trains per hour on Beijing
    Grid value is justified by pre-experiments; Beijing value comes from operational managers. These bounds shape achievable frequency increases.
  • Algorithm tuning parameters Delta_1, Delta_2, I, epsilon = Delta_1=5, Delta_2=10, I starts at 20 or 5, epsilon starts at 0.01% or 1%
    Set based on preliminary experiments and dynamically adjusted; no robustness analysis across these values is reported.
  • Baseline budget B = Cost-minimal line plan cost on grid; existing line plan cost on Beijing
    The budget determines how many and how frequently lines can be operated; results are reported relative to this scenario-defining value.
assumptions (5)
  • ad hoc to paper Passenger discomfort on an arc is modeled as gamma_a x_a^2 / y_l(a), linear in utilization and inversely proportional to frequency.
    Introduced in Eq. (1a) as a modeling choice and not derived from passenger utility data. The same function is used for optimization and for the user-equilibrium evaluation.
  • domain assumption Passenger demand per OD pair is fixed and known from AFC data, and all demand must be served.
    Stated in Section 3 via constraints (1g) and (2g). No demand elasticity or mode-shift response is modeled.
  • domain assumption The change-and-go network faithfully represents passenger routes and transfer behavior.
    Adopted from Schobel and Scholl (2005) in Section 3. The validity of the route generation and crowding accounting depends on this representation capturing real transfer costs and choices.
  • domain assumption A fixed line pool is given a priori, generated by shortest paths between selected terminal stations.
    Section 6.1 describes the line pool construction. The quality of the final line plan is limited by the quality of this pool, since lines outside the pool cannot be selected.
  • standard math The Wardrop user equilibrium is found by minimizing the convex potential function in Formulation (4).
    Section 5 cites Roughgarden (2007), Proposition 18.11. This standard result requires continuous non-decreasing arc cost functions, which the linear perceived-cost functions satisfy.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Line planning under crowding: A cut-and-column generation approach." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/BBTOIKQX

@misc{pith2026250113819,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Line planning under crowding: A cut-and-column generation approach},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/BBTOIKQX}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.13819}
}
read the original abstract

Problem definition: To mitigate excessive crowding in public transit networks, network expansion is often not feasible due to financial and time constraints. Instead, operators are required to make use of existing infrastructure more efficiently. In this regard, this paper considers the problem of determining lines and frequencies in a public transit system, factoring in the impact of crowding. Methodology: We introduce a novel formulation to address the line planning problem under crowding and propose a mixed-integer second-order cone programming (MI-SOCP) reformulation. Three variants of the cut-and-column generation algorithm with tailored acceleration techniques find near-system-optimal solutions by dynamically generating passenger routes and adding linear cutting planes to deal with the non-linearity introduced by the crowding terms. We find integral solutions using a diving heuristic. In practice, passengers may deviate from system-optimal routes. We, thus, evaluate line plans by computing a user-equilibrium routing based on Wardrop's first principle. Results and implications: We experimentally evaluate the performance of the proposed approaches on both an artificial network and the Beijing metro network. The results demonstrate that our algorithm effectively scales to large-scale instances involving hundreds of stations and candidate lines, and nearly 57,000 origin-destination pairs. We find that considering crowding while developing line plans can significantly reduce crowding, at only a minor expense to the travel time passengers experience. This holds both for system-optimal passenger routing and user-optimal passenger routing, which only differ slightly.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

41 extracted references · 38 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    , " * write output.state after.block = add.period write newline

    ENTRY address author booktitle chapter doi edition editor eid howpublished institution isbn journal key month note number organization pages publisher school series title type url volume year label extra.label sort.label short.list INTEGERS output.state before.all mid.sentence after.sentence after.block FUNCTION init.state.consts #0 'before.all := #1 'mid...

  2. [2]

    write newline

    " write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION n.dashify 't := "" t empty not t #1 #1 substring "-" = t #1 #2 substring "--" = not "--" * t #2 global.max substring 't := t #1 #1 substring "-" = "-" * t #2 global.max substring 't := while if t #1 #1 substring * t #2 global.max substring 't := if while FUNCTION word.in "" FUNCTION format.date year ...

  3. [3]

    Transportation Science 57(2):351--375

    Basciftci B, Van Hentenryck P, 2023 Capturing travel mode adoption in designing on-demand multimodal transit systems. Transportation Science 57(2):351--375

    work page 2023

  4. [4]

    Transportation Science 57(5):1276--1295

    Bayram V, Y ld z B, Farham MS, 2023 Hub network design problem with capacity, congestion, and stochastic demand considerations. Transportation Science 57(5):1276--1295

    work page 2023

  5. [5]

    ://www.peopleapp.com/rmharticle/30002598532, accessed: 2024-07-01

    Beijing Municipal Government Press Office , 2023 New technology breaks bottlenecks: Frequency on the beijing metro is expected to decrease to 1 minute and 30 seconds. ://www.peopleapp.com/rmharticle/30002598532, accessed: 2024-07-01

    work page arXiv 2023

  6. [6]

    Operations Research 69(4):1118--1133

    Bertsimas D, Ng YS, Yan J, 2021 Data-driven transit network design at scale. Operations Research 69(4):1118--1133

    work page 2021

  7. [7]

    o rfer R, Gr\

    Bornd\" o rfer R, Gr\" o tschel M, Pfetsch ME, 2007 A column-generation approach to line planning in public transport. Transportation Science 41(1):123--132

    work page 2007

  8. [8]

    Transportation Research Part B: Methodological 136:1--29

    Cacchiani V, Qi J, Yang L, 2020 Robust optimization models for integrated train stop planning and timetabling with passenger demand uncertainty. Transportation Research Part B: Methodological 136:1--29

    work page 2020

Show all 41 references
  1. [9]

    Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review 127:1--30

    Canca D, De-Los-Santos A, Laporte G, Mesa JA, 2019 Integrated railway rapid transit network design and line planning problem with maximum profit. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review 127:1--30

    2019

  2. [10]

    Transportation Research Part B: Methodological 181:102891

    Chai S, Yin J, D’Ariano A, Liu R, Yang L, Tang T, 2024 A branch-and-cut algorithm for scheduling train platoons in urban rail networks. Transportation Research Part B: Methodological 181:102891

    2024

  3. [11]

    Daganzo CF, 1997 Fundamentals of Transportation and Traffic Operations (Emerald Publishing)

    1997

  4. [12]

    Transportation Science 58(2):279--294

    De Vos MH, Van Lieshout RN, Dollevoet T, 2024 Electric vehicle scheduling in public transit with capacitated charging stations. Transportation Science 58(2):279--294

    2024

  5. [13]

    Transportation Science 52(4):756--768

    Franceschetti A, Honhon D, Laporte G, Van Woensel T, 2018 A shortest-path algorithm for the departure time and speed optimization problem. Transportation Science 52(4):756--768

    2018

  6. [14]

    o bel A, 2017 a Angebotsplanung im \

    Friedrich M, Hartl M, Schiewe A, Sch \"o bel A, 2017 a Angebotsplanung im \"o ffentlichen verkehr-planerische und algorithmische l \"o sungen . Heureka’17 9

    2017

  7. [15]

    Friedrich M, Hartl M, Schiewe A, Sch\" o bel A, 2017 b Integrating passengers' assignment in cost-optimal line planning . 17th Workshop on Algorithmic Approaches for Transportation Modelling, Optimization, and Systems (ATMOS 2017), volume 59 of Open Access Series in Informatic...

    2017

  8. [16]

    Public Transport 9:7--32

    Gattermann P, Harbering J, Sch \"o bel A, 2017 Line pool generation. Public Transport 9:7--32

    2017

  9. [17]

    European Journal of Operational Research 259(2):424--436

    Goerigk M, Schmidt M, 2017 Line planning with user-optimal route choice. European Journal of Operational Research 259(2):424--436

    2017

  10. [18]

    Transportation Science 38(3):379--393

    Goossens JW, Van Hoesel S, Kroon L, 2004 A branch-and-cut approach for solving railway line-planning problems. Transportation Science 38(3):379--393

    2004

  11. [19]

    European Journal of Operational Research 168(2):403--424

    Goossens JW, Van Hoesel S, Kroon L, 2006 On solving multi-type railway line planning problems. European Journal of Operational Research 168(2):403--424

    2006

  12. [20]

    Transportation Science 57(2):336--350

    Hartleb J, Schmidt M, Huisman D, Friedrich M, 2023 Modeling and solving line planning with mode choice. Transportation Science 57(2):336--350

    2023

  13. [21]

    Transportation Science 56(6):1452--1468

    Jiang Y, Rasmussen TK, Nielsen OA, 2022 Integrated optimization of transit networks with schedule- and frequency-based services subject to the bounded stochastic user equilibrium. Transportation Science 56(6):1452--1468

    2022

  14. [22]

    Transportation Science 57(6):1433--1451

    K nay OB, Gzara F, Alumur SA, 2023 Charging station location and sizing for electric vehicles under congestion. Transportation Science 57(6):1433--1451

    2023

  15. [23]

    INFORMS Journal on Computing 30(4):768--782

    Kowalczyk D, Leus R, 2018 A branch-and-price algorithm for parallel machine scheduling using zdds and generic branching. INFORMS Journal on Computing 30(4):768--782

    2018

  16. [24]

    Transportation Research Part B: Methodological 168:27--55

    Lu Y, Yang L, Yang H, Zhou H, Gao Z, 2023 Robust collaborative passenger flow control on a congested metro line: A joint optimization with train timetabling. Transportation Research Part B: Methodological 168:27--55

    2023

  17. [25]

    Engineering 12:202--220

    Lu Y, Yang L, Yang K, Gao Z, Zhou H, Meng F, Qi J, 2022 A distributionally robust optimization method for passenger flow control strategy and train scheduling on an urban rail transit line. Engineering 12:202--220

    2022

  18. [26]

    Transportation Research Part B: Methodological 158:239--272

    Luan X, Corman F, 2022 Passenger-oriented traffic control for rail networks: An optimization model considering crowding effects on passenger choices and train operations. Transportation Research Part B: Methodological 158:239--272

    2022

  19. [27]

    Nisan N, Roughgarden T, Tardos E, Vazirani VV, eds., Algorithmic game theory, chapter 18, 459--484 (Cambridge University Press)

    Roughgarden T, 2007 Routing games. Nisan N, Roughgarden T, Tardos E, Vazirani VV, eds., Algorithmic game theory, chapter 18, 459--484 (Cambridge University Press)

    2007

  20. [28]

    European Journal of Operational Research 274(2):560--573

    Schiewe A, Schiewe P, Schmidt M, 2019 The line planning routing game. European Journal of Operational Research 274(2):560--573

    2019

  21. [29]

    ager S, Sch\

    Schiewe P, J\"ager S, Sch\" o bel A, 2024 Lintim - integrated optimization in public transportation. https://www.lintim.net/, open source

    2024

  22. [30]

    Transportation Science 54(6):1714--1731

    Schiewe P, Sch\" o bel A, 2020 Periodic timetabling with integrated routing: Toward applicable approaches. Transportation Science 54(6):1714--1731

    2020

  23. [31]

    Schmidt M, 2012 Line planning with equilibrium routing. Ph.D. thesis, Institute for Numerical and Applied Mathematics, University of Gottingen

    2012

  24. [32]

    ://arxiv.org/abs/2405.10074

    Schmidt M, Schöbel A, 2024 Planning and optimizing transit lines. ://arxiv.org/abs/2405.10074

    2024 arXiv

  25. [33]

    OR Spectrum 34:491--510

    Sch\" o bel A, 2012 Line planning in public transportation: models and methods. OR Spectrum 34:491--510

    2012

  26. [34]

    Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies 74:348--365

    Sch \"o bel A, 2017 An eigenmodel for iterative line planning, timetabling and vehicle scheduling in public transportation. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies 74:348--365

    2017

  27. [35]

    Proceeding of 5th Workshop on Algorithmic Methods and Models for Optimization of Railways (Germany)

    Sch \"o bel A, Scholl S, 2005 Line planning with minimal transfers. Proceeding of 5th Workshop on Algorithmic Methods and Models for Optimization of Railways (Germany)

    2005

  28. [36]

    https://www.un.org/en/un75/shifting-demographics, [Accessed March 28, 2023]

    United Nations , 2019 Shifting Demographics: A Visual Guide . https://www.un.org/en/un75/shifting-demographics, [Accessed March 28, 2023]

    2019

  29. [37]

    Transportation Science 54(3):740--761

    Van Lieshout RN, Bouman PC, Huisman D, 2020 Determining and evaluating alternative line plans in out-of-control situations. Transportation Science 54(3):740--761

    2020

  30. [38]

    Proceedings of the Institute of Civil Engineers Part II(1):325--378

    Wardrop JG, 1952 Some theoretical aspects of road traffic research. Proceedings of the Institute of Civil Engineers Part II(1):325--378

    1952

  31. [39]

    ://arxiv.org/abs/2410.16409

    Xia D, Ma J, Sharif Azadeh S, 2024 Integrated timetabling, vehicle scheduling, and dynamic capacity allocation of modular autonomous vehicles under demand uncertainty. ://arxiv.org/abs/2410.16409

    2024 arXiv

  32. [40]

    Transportation Research Part B: Methodological 186:102989

    Yao Z, Nie L, Fu H, 2024 Railway line planning with passenger routing: Direct-service network representations and a two-phase solution approach. Transportation Research Part B: Methodological 186:102989

    2024

  33. [41]

    European Journal of Operational Research 295(1):183--202

    Yin J, D’Ariano A, Wang Y, Yang L, Tang T, 2021 Timetable coordination in a rail transit network with time-dependent passenger demand. European Journal of Operational Research 295(1):183--202

    2021

Pith tools

Reviewed August 10, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.