Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 52 references

Multi-period line planning for varying railway passenger demand with asymmetric lines

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-05 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Allowing line plans to change during the day can cut total passenger journey time by up to 4.26%, with asymmetric lines doing the heavy lifting.

desk verdict A genuine modeling contribution—first to combine route selection, stop patterns, frequencies, transfers, and asymmetric lines in a network—but the headline 4.26% benefit is an incumbent-vs-incumbent comparison under large optimality gaps and an unmodeled one-directional service cost; the modeling deserves peer review, the headline needs tempering. read the letter →

arxiv 2509.02052 v1 pith:XPI3M6I2 submitted 2025-09-02 math.OC

Renate J. H. van der Knaap , Niels van Oort , Menno de Bruyn , Rob M. P. Goverde This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.OC MSC 90C1190B0690C29
keywords multi-periodlineplanningasymmetriclinesgeneralisedjourneytimechange-and-gonetworktime-dependentdemandrailwaynetworksepsilon-constraintmethodstop
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

Most railway networks run one line plan all day even though demand shifts in volume and direction between morning peak, midday, and afternoon peak. This paper argues the fixed plan is wasteful, and builds a mixed-integer optimization model that chooses routes, stopping patterns, and frequencies separately for each period — including lines that stop or run more often in one direction than the other. Tested on a real Dutch network, the model finds that letting the line plan adapt through the day cuts total generalised journey time by up to 4.26% compared with a near-fixed reference plan, and that asymmetric lines drive much of the gain. The authors translate the saving into a revenue increase of roughly 3.45% using standard demand elasticities, which is why the result would matter to any railway operator deciding whether daily plan changes are worth the operational hassle.

What carries the argument

The change-and-go network, which represents each line by departure and arrival nodes and each station by In, Change, and Out nodes so that passenger paths, transfers, and waits become linear flow constraints; frequency-indexed boarding arcs whose costs come from a stated-preference entry-resistance curve, which keeps the model linear; a symmetry parameter σ that doubles capacities, costs, and change counts when symmetric (two-direction) lines are enforced; and ε-constraint search (AUGMECON2) that repeatedly solves the model with different caps on line-plan changes to trace the Pareto frontier between journey time and timetable stability.

What would settle it

Re-solve the Dutch case study with a calibrated 'wrong-direction penalty' added whenever a passenger must ride away from their destination to board a train, using values from a stated-preference survey of travellers at one-direction-only stations. If the 4.26% gain survives realistic penalty values, the result is robust; if it collapses, the headline improvement is an artifact of system-optimal assignment.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper claims that optimizing a railway line plan separately for each demand period — instead of operating one fixed plan all day — measurably improves passenger service under the same operating budget. The model minimises total generalised journey time, defined as in-vehicle time plus frequency-dependent waiting and transfer penalties, across three periods: morning hyper peak, midday off-peak, and afternoon hyper peak, while capping how much the plan may change between periods. On a real Dutch network, symmetric lines with 40 allowed adjustments cut GJT by 1.94% versus the 20-adjustment reference plan, while asymmetric lines with 70 adjustments cut it by 4.26%. Asymmetric plans serve low

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that passenger experience is fully captured by rerouting time: serving a station in only one direction is assumed to cost passengers nothing beyond the extra travel time, and the authors concede this may make asymmetric plans look better than they are.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Operators get a quantified trade-off frontier: the first adjustments, mostly to frequencies, yield the largest journey-time savings, while later stopping-pattern changes give diminishing returns.
  • At equal budget and equal number of daily adjustments, asymmetric lines beat symmetric lines by 0.2% to 2.5% in the case study.
  • Skipping low-demand stops in one direction only keeps those stations served while speeding the dominant passenger flow, so directional service can replace full service at lower cost.
  • A 4.26% GJT reduction translates to roughly 3.45% revenue growth under the cited elasticity, about €99 million at the operator's 2023 revenue level.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The 4.26% gain is computed under system-optimal passenger routing; a penalty for the psychological cost of one-direction-only stations, which the authors flag as missing, would likely shrink it.
  • The pattern that frequency changes dominate early savings suggests a design heuristic: spend the first budget of daily adjustments on frequencies and use stop-pattern changes only when frequency headroom is exhausted.
  • Including rolling-stock circulation and transition logistics between period plans — both outside this model — would raise the real cost of adjustments and may move the practical optimum to fewer changes.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a mixed-integer linear programming model for multi-period railway line planning. The model chooses routes, stopping patterns, frequencies, transfers, and—unlike most existing work—allows asymmetric lines with direction-dependent stop patterns and frequencies. Passenger routing is modelled on a change-and-go network with origin-grouped flows, and the ε-constraint method is used to generate Pareto-optimal line plans with different numbers of daily adjustments. The approach is tested on a three-period case study of the Dutch network around Leiden, The Hague, Rotterdam, and Utrecht. The central quantitative claim is that allowing line-plan changes during the day can reduce total generalised journey time (GJT) by up to 4.26% relative to a symmetric 20-adjustment reference plan, with the largest gains attributed to asymmetric lines.

Significance. If the empirical claim were robust, the paper would make a useful contribution to network-level, time-dependent line planning. The change-and-go formulation with origin-grouped flows is technically solid and the explicit control of the number of line-plan adjustments is a pragmatic way to model regularity concerns. The paper also fills a clear gap in Table 1: no prior network-level railway model combines route selection, stop-pattern selection, frequencies, transfers, and asymmetric lines in a multi-period setting. However, two issues prevent me from endorsing the headline result as it stands: the 4.26% figure is a comparison of heuristic incumbents with large optimality gaps, and the asymmetric-line benefit depends on a passenger cost that is acknowledged in Section 6 but not modelled or quantified. These are load-bearing for the paper's practical claims, including the revenue-impact estimate in Section 5.1.

major comments (3)
  1. [§5.1, Table 7] The headline 'up to 4.26%' reduction is the difference between two feasible incumbents: the symmetric 20-adjustment reference (GJT 5,632,353) and the asymmetric 70-adjustment solution (GJT 5,392,625). The reported optimality gaps are 6.7% for the reference and 15.2% for the asymmetric solution. Because the symmetric model's true optimum could be substantially lower than the incumbent, the comparison does not establish that 4.26% is the maximum achievable improvement, or even that asymmetric plans are better than the best symmetric plan at the same adjustment count. I recommend rephrasing the claim as 'we found feasible plans with GJT reductions of up to 4.26% under the model's GJT definition', and using the period-wise lower bounds to state what can and cannot be concluded about the true optimum. Ideally, solve at least the reference and the 40-adjustment symmetric cases to much smaller
  2. [§6 and §5.3.2] The asymmetric plans achieve part of their advantage by serving stations such as Gvm, Vst, and Dvnk in only one direction. Section 6 concedes that 'How passengers feel about this is not taken into account in this study, which might make the asymmetric line plans look better than they really are.' This is not merely a cosmetic limitation: the same section uses the 4.26% GJT reduction to estimate a 3.45% revenue increase and €99.3 million for NS. A modest per-trip penalty for passengers whose desired direction is unserved could erase or reverse the asymmetric advantage. I ask for a sensitivity analysis: add a fixed GJT penalty (e.g., 0, 5, 10, 15 minutes) to affected trips and report at what penalty the 4.26% result disappears. This would turn a conceded limitation into a quantified boundary.
  3. [§3.3.1, Table 3, Eqs. (14)-(16), (21)] There is an inconsistency in the definition and use of the frequency-change variable. Table 3 defines ef^{l,p} without a frequency index, but constraints (14) and (15) are written for each i ∈ F^l using the same ef^{l,p}, and constraint (16) sums ef^{l,p} over i. As written, each frequency change contributes |F^l| to the adjustment count rather than 1, which would make the 'number of adjustments' in Table 7 inconsistent with the ε bound. If ef is intended to be indexed by i, Table 3 and (21) should be corrected. If not, the sum over i in (16) should be replaced by a single term. This issue is load-bearing because the entire Pareto analysis is framed in terms of adjustment counts.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Eq. (17)] The domain of the stopping variable x^{l,p}_s incorrectly includes 'i ∈ F^l'; x does not depend on the frequency index. Remove it.
  2. [Eq. (21)] The domain of ef^{l,pj} includes 'i ∈ F^l' although ef has no frequency index in Table 3. This should be aligned with the corrected definition from the major comment above.
  3. [Table 7] The column 'Optimality gap' mixes Gurobi gaps (starred) with gaps computed from period-wise lower bounds. Please state this distinction in the table caption or in a footnote, and clarify which lower bound is used for each non-starred entry.
  4. [§5.1] The revenue-impact estimate of €99.3 million is presented without the caveats attached later in Section 6. It should be labelled as an illustrative upper bound that assumes the modelled GJT fully captures passenger welfare and that the incumbent gap does not affect the comparison.
  5. [Throughout] Minor typographical and style issues: 'AUGMECON2' is used inconsistently with spacing; the phrase 'approximate the Pareto optimal solutions' should acknowledge that the ε-constraint runs are terminated by a time limit, so the obtained frontiers are heuristic approximations.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the 4.26% GJT reduction is an internal optimization result; the self-citations provide external empirical inputs (demand periods, GJT arc penalties), not the conclusion.

full rationale

The paper's central result is obtained by solving (MP-LPP) for different ε bounds and comparing total GJT values. The GJT is defined by arc costs in the change-and-go network (Section 3.2) and passenger flows obey flow conservation (2). Nothing in the optimization is fitted to reproduce the 4.26% figure. The demand periods are taken from Van der Knaap et al. (2024) and the boarding/transfer penalties from Guis et al. (2023) and de Bruyn et al. (2023); these are external empirical inputs and are not adjusted to the case-study result. The fact that the asymmetric model contains all symmetric solutions is explicitly acknowledged by the authors ('all the solutions with symmetric lines are also allowed in the asymmetric case'), so the sign of the comparison is a feasible-set monotonicity, not a circular derivation; the magnitude 0.2–2.5% (same-adjustment) and 4.26% (more adjustments) is data-dependent. The admitted omission of an additional passenger cost for stations served in only one direction (Section 6: 'How passengers feel about this is not taken into account...') is a threat to external validity, not to the internal derivation chain. Large optimality gaps (e.g., 15.2% for the asymmetric 70-adjustment plan) concern solution quality, not circularity. Overall, the derivation does not reduce to its own inputs; at most there are minor self-citations that are not load-bearing in the circular sense.

Assumptions & free parameters 7 free parameters · 8 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The model rests on standard MILP machinery plus domain assumptions about demand, passenger behavior, capacity, and cost. The free parameters are mostly inputs from earlier studies or case-specific choices; none are fitted to reproduce the 4.26% result, but they shape it. The most fragile inputs are the GJT arc costs, the period budgets, and the internally chosen reference baseline.

free parameters (7)
  • GJT arc costs (In/In-change waiting penalties, Stop/Out penalties) = In-F2=31.85 min, Stop=3.55 min, Out=0.7 min (Table 6)
    Set from the authors' earlier stated-preference studies (Guis et al. 2023, de Bruyn et al. 2023) plus assumptions of uniform departure and equal headways. These costs define the objective and directly determine the optimal line plans and the reported GJT reductions.
  • Budget per period (train-km per hour) = bP1=bP3=3108, bP2=1554
    Based on the May 2023 operator plan for peak periods and half this budget for off-peak. The budget caps frequencies and therefore shapes the possible line plans and the size of the GJT improvement.
  • Period lengths = hP1=1.5, hP2=5.5, hP3=1.5 hours
    Chosen from the authors' demand clustering, with 0.5 hours added to the morning peak to allow balanced daily frequencies. Period lengths weight the GJT contributions in the objective.
  • Transfer station set = Large stations only
    Chosen because tests showed that allowing transfers at all stations produced the same line plan but longer solver times or larger gaps. This restricts passenger routing options and can affect the resulting GJT.
  • Number of candidate lines per route = 1
    Set after tests showed the model prefers one high-frequency line per route over two lines with different stopping patterns. This shrinks the solution space and affects the attainable GJT.
  • Reference adjustment count (baseline) = 20 adjustments
    Chosen as the first scenario using at least 98.5% of the budget in each period. All percentage improvements are measured against this internally generated symmetric baseline rather than against the actual operated timetable.
  • Objective tie-break coefficient delta = 10^-3
    Set according to AUGMECON2 guidance to prefer solutions with fewer line plan changes when GJT values are equal.
assumptions (8)
  • domain assumption Passenger demand per OD pair per period is known and fixed (from smart card data).
    Input OD matrices sum half-hour data for hyper-peak and midday periods (Section 4).
  • domain assumption Passengers arrive uniformly over the hour and trains are equally spaced; waiting cost equals half the headway plus an acceleration penalty.
    Section 4, paragraph on arc costs; used to derive the In-arc GJT values in Table 6.
  • domain assumption Passenger flow is assigned to minimize total GJT (system optimum), not user equilibrium.
    Flow conservation (2) combined with the GJT objective (1) in Section 3.3; no equilibrium constraint is imposed.
  • domain assumption Symmetric lines carry twice the capacity of a one-directional line (capacity multiplied by sigma=2).
    Constraints (5)-(9); assumes a symmetric line's two directions share the same stopping pattern and frequency without capacity interaction.
  • domain assumption The disutility of a station served in only one direction is fully captured by rerouting time in GJT.
    Authors concede in Section 6 that this is not taken into account and may make asymmetric line plans look better than they really are.
  • domain assumption Line plan cost is linear in train-kilometers and capped per period by budget (10).
    Cost model (10) and budget inputs in Section 4.
  • ad hoc to paper Terminal balance over the whole day (11) is required to facilitate rolling stock planning.
    Constraint (11) equates total departing and arriving frequencies at terminal stations across all periods; it restricts the feasible set of line plans.
  • ad hoc to paper An adjustment is counted per stop/frequency change and each change is weighted equally in constraints (12)-(16).
    The change metric is defined in Section 3.3 and used as the second objective via the epsilon bound; the equal weighting is a modeling choice.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Multi-period line planning for varying railway passenger demand with asymmetric lines." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/XPI3M6I2

@misc{pith2026250902052,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Multi-period line planning for varying railway passenger demand with asymmetric lines},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/XPI3M6I2}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2509.02052}
}
read the original abstract

A line plan is an important aspect of the quality of the service provided to railway passengers. Although it is well-known that railway demand is varying throughout the day in volume and structure, the line plan is often still fixed throughout the day. To better match this varying railway demand, we propose a mixed-integer linear programming model for multi-period line planning. This model for railway networks incorporates selection of routes, stopping patterns, frequencies, transfers, and the possibility of asymmetric lines to deal with spatially unbalanced demand. The Epsilon-constraint method is used to determine Pareto optimal solutions. The proposed model and solution method are tested on a case study of part of the Dutch railway network. The results show that allowing for changes to the line plan during the day can reduce the total generalised journey time by up to 4.26%, especially when asymmetric lines are used.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

52 extracted references · 52 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    , author Ceder, A

    author Amiripour, S.M. , author Ceder, A. , author Mohaymany, A.S. , year 2014 . title Designing large-scale bus network with seasonal variations of demand . journal Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies volume 48 , pages 322--338

    work page 2014

  2. [2]

    , author Tamp \`e re, C.M.J

    author Avila-Ord \'o \ n ez , E. , author Tamp \`e re, C.M.J. , author Vanegas Peralta, P. , author Vansteenwegen, P. , year 2022 . title The design of a flexible bus line plan . journal Expert Systems with Applications volume 203

    work page 2022

  3. [3]

    , author Maknoon, Y

    author Binder, S. , author Maknoon, Y. , author Bierlaire, M. , year 2017 . title The multi-objective railway timetable rescheduling problem . journal Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies volume 78 , pages 78--94

    work page 2017

  4. [4]

    o rfer, R. , author Gr \

    author Bornd \"o rfer, R. , author Gr \"o tschel, M. , author Pfetsch, M.E. , year 2008 . title Models for Line Planning in Public Transport , in: editor Hickman, M. , editor Mirchandani, P. , editor Vo , S. (Eds.), booktitle Computer-Aided Systems in Public Transport . publisher Springer Berlin Heidelberg , address Berlin, Heidelberg . volume volume 600 ...

    work page 2008

  5. [5]

    , author Hoppmann, H

    author Bornd \"o rfer, R. , author Hoppmann, H. , author Karbstein, M. , year 2013 . title A Configuration Model for the Line Planning Problem , in: booktitle ATMOS - 13th Workshop on Algorithmic Approaches for Transportation Modelling , Optimization , and Systems - 2013 , pp. pages 68--79

    work page 2013

  6. [6]

    , author Larsen, J

    author Bull, S. , author Larsen, J. , author Lusby, R.M. , author Rezanova, N.J. , year 2019 . title Optimising the travel time of a line plan . journal 4OR volume 17 , pages 225--259

    work page 2019

  7. [7]

    , year 1998

    author Bussieck, M.R. , year 1998 . title Optimal Lines in Public Transport . Ph.D. thesis. Technische Universit \"a t Braunschweig

    work page 1998

  8. [8]

    , author Wilson, N.H.M

    author Ceder, A. , author Wilson, N.H.M. , year 1986 . title Bus network design . journal Transportation Research Part B: Methodological volume 20 , pages 331--344

    work page 1986

Show all 52 references
  1. [9]

    title I nwoners per gemeente

    author Centraal Bureau voor de Statistiek , year 2025 . title I nwoners per gemeente . howpublished https://www.cbs.nl/nl-nl/visualisaties/dashboard-bevolking/regionaal/inwoners . note [Accessed on 04-06-2025]

    2025

  2. [10]

    , author van Dijk , N.M

    author Claessens, M.T. , author van Dijk , N.M. , author Zwaneveld, P.J. , year 1998 . title Cost optimal allocation of rail passenger lines . journal European Journal of Operational Research volume 110 , pages 474--489

    1998

  3. [11]

    , author Mulangi, R.H

    author Cyril, A. , author Mulangi, R.H. , author George, V. , year 2020 . title Demand- Based Model for Line Planning in Public Transport . journal Transportation Research Procedia volume 48 , pages 2589--2596

    2020

  4. [12]

    , author Vaatstra, I

    author de Bruyn , M. , author Vaatstra, I. , author van Heijningen , P. , year 2023 . title De reiziger kiest: korter onderweg of minder overstappen? , in: booktitle Proceedings of Colloquium Vervoersplanologisch Speurwerk (CVS) , address Brussels, Belgium . note (In Dutch)

    2023

  5. [13]

    , author Li, D

    author Dong, X. , author Li, D. , author Yin, Y. , author Ding, S. , author Cao, Z. , year 2020 . title Integrated optimization of train stop planning and timetabling for commuter railways with an extended adaptive large neighborhood search metaheuristic approach . journal Tra...

    2020

  6. [14]

    , author Van Kooten Niekerk, M

    author Dur \'a n-Micco , J. , author Van Kooten Niekerk, M. , author Vansteenwegen, P. , year 2022 . title Designing bus line plans for realistic cases - the Utrecht case study . journal Expert Systems with Applications volume 187 , pages 115918

    2022

  7. [15]

    , author Vansteenwegen, P

    author Dur \'a n-Micco , J. , author Vansteenwegen, P. , year 2022 . title A survey on the transit network design and frequency setting problem . journal Public Transport volume 14 , pages 155--190

    2022

  8. [16]

    , author Nie, L

    author Fu, H. , author Nie, L. , author Meng, L. , author Sperry, B.R. , author He, Z. , year 2015 . title A hierarchical line planning approach for a large-scale high speed rail network: The China case . journal Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice volume 75 , ...

    2015

  9. [17]

    , author Van Hoesel, S

    author Goossens, J.W. , author Van Hoesel, S. , author Kroon, L. , year 2004 . title A Branch-and-Cut Approach for Solving Railway Line-Planning Problems . journal Transportation Science volume 38 , pages 379--393

    2004

  10. [18]

    , author Yang, H

    author Guan, J.F. , author Yang, H. , author Wirasinghe, S.C. , year 2006 . title Simultaneous optimization of transit line configuration and passenger line assignment . journal Transportation Research Part B: Methodological volume 40 , pages 885--902

    2006

  11. [19]

    , author de Bruyn , M

    author Guis, N. , author de Bruyn , M. , author Selten, W. , year 2023 . title De reiziger kiest: korter onderweg of vaker een trein? , in: booktitle Proceedings of Colloquium Vervoersplanologisch Speurwerk (CVS) , address Brussels, Belgium . note (In Dutch)

    2023

  12. [20]

    , author Shires, J

    author Johnson, D. , author Shires, J. , author Nash, C. , author Tyler, J. , year 2006 . title Forecasting and appraising the impact of a regular interval timetable . journal Transport Policy volume 13 , pages 349--366

    2006

  13. [21]

    , author Raviv, T

    author Kaspi, M. , author Raviv, T. , year 2013 . title Service-oriented line planning and timetabling for passenger trains . journal Transportation Science volume 47 , pages 295--311

    2013

  14. [22]

    , author Xu, R

    author Li, S. , author Xu, R. , author Han, K. , year 2019 . title Demand-oriented train services optimization for a congested urban rail line: Integrating short turning and heterogeneous headways . journal Transportmetrica A: Transport Science volume 15 , pages 1459--1486

    2019

  15. [23]

    , author Florios, K

    author Mavrotas, G. , author Florios, K. , year 2013 . title An improved version of the augmented -constraint method ( AUGMECON2 ) for finding the exact pareto set in multi-objective integer programming problems . journal Applied Mathematics and Computation volume 219 , pages ...

    2013

  16. [24]

    , author D'Ariano, A

    author Mo, P. , author D'Ariano, A. , author Yang, L. , author Veelenturf, L.P. , author Gao, Z. , year 2021 . title An exact method for the integrated optimization of subway lines operation strategies with asymmetric passenger demand and operating costs . journal Transportati...

    2021

  17. [25]

    , author Jerosch, K

    author Nachtigall, K. , author Jerosch, K. , year 2008 . title Simultaneous Network Line Planning and Traffic Assignment , in: booktitle 8th Workshop on Algorithmic Approaches for Transportation Modeling , Optimization , and Systems ( ATMOS '08) , publisher Schloss Dagstuhl--L...

    2008

  18. [26]

    title Nederlandse Spoorwegen, 2023 Annual Report

    author Nederlandse Spoorwegen , year 2024 . title Nederlandse Spoorwegen, 2023 Annual Report . howpublished https://www.nsannualreport.nl/annual-report-2023/financial-performance/financial-results

    2024

  19. [27]

    , author Nie, L

    author Nie, B. , author Nie, L. , author Fu, H. , author Wu, X. , year 2023 . title Weekly line planning to improve the match between rail supply and passenger demand . journal Computer-Aided Civil and Infrastructure Engineering volume 38 , pages 1810--1833

    2023

  20. [28]

    , author Peng, Q

    author Ning, J. , author Peng, Q. , author Zhu, Y. , author Jiang, Y. , author Nielsen, O.A. , year 2022 . title A Bi-objective optimization model for the last train timetabling problem . journal Journal of Rail Transport Planning & Management volume 23 , pages 100333

    2022

  21. [29]

    , author Tr \'e panier, M

    author Pelletier, M.P. , author Tr \'e panier, M. , author Morency, C. , year 2011 . title Smart card data use in public transit: A literature review . journal Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies volume 19 , pages 557--568

    2011

  22. [30]

    , author Cacchiani, V

    author Qi, J. , author Cacchiani, V. , author Yang, L. , author Zhang, C. , author Di, Z. , year 2021 . title An Integer Linear Programming model for integrated train stop planning and timetabling with time-dependent passenger demand . journal Computers & Operations Research v...

    2021

  23. [31]

    , author Wang, Z

    author Qu, H. , author Wang, Z. , author Liu, X. , year 2023 . title Optimizing Integrated All-Stop , Express , and Short-Turn Services on a Metro Line with Capacity Constraint Considering Passenger Spatio-Temporal Path Choice . journal Transportation Research Record: Journal ...

    2023

  24. [32]

    , author Ahmadi Digehsara, A

    author S ahin, G. , author Ahmadi Digehsara, A. , author Bornd \"o rfer, R. , author Schlechte, T. , year 2020 . title Multi-period line planning with resource transfers . journal Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies volume 119

    2020

  25. [33]

    , author Sch \"o bel, A

    author Schiewe, A. , author Sch \"o bel, A. , author Sieber, L. , year 2023 . title Line Planning for Different Demand Periods . journal Operations Research Forum volume 4 , pages 92

    2023

  26. [34]

    , year 2012

    author Sch \"o bel, A. , year 2012 . title Line planning in public transportation: Models and methods . journal OR Spectrum volume 34 , pages 491--510

    2012

  27. [35]

    , author Scholl, S

    author Sch \"o bel, A. , author Scholl, S. , year 2005 . title Line Planning with Minimal Traveling Time , in: booktitle 5th Workshop on Algorithmic Methods and Models for Optimization of Railways , address Palma de Mallorca, Spain

    2005

  28. [36]

    , author Yang, J

    author Shi, J. , author Yang, J. , author Yang, L. , author Tao, L. , author Qiang, S. , author Di, Z. , author Guo, J. , year 2023 . title Safety-oriented train timetabling and stop planning with time-varying and elastic demand on overcrowded commuter metro lines . journal Tr...

    2023

  29. [37]

    , year 2020

    author Stoilova, S. , year 2020 . title An Integrated Multi-Criteria and Multi-Objective Optimization Approach for Establishing the Transport Plan of Intercity Trains . journal Sustainability volume 12 , pages 687

    2020

  30. [38]

    , author Hassard, R

    author Tyler, J. , author Hassard, R. , year 1973 . title Gravity/ Elasticity Models for the Planning of the Inter Urban Rail Passenger Business , in: booktitle Proceedings of the PTRC Summer Annual Meeting , address University of Warwick

    1973

  31. [39]

    , author De Bruyn, M

    author Van der Knaap , R.J.H. , author De Bruyn, M. , author Van Oort, N. , author Huisman, D. , author Goverde, R.M.P. , year 2024 . title Clustering railway passenger demand patterns from large-scale origin--destination data . journal Journal of Rail Transport Planning & Man...

    2024

  32. [40]

    , year 2011

    author Van Oort, N. , year 2011 . title Service Reliability and Urban Public Transport Design . publisher PhD thesis, Delft University of Technology , address The Netherlands

    2011

  33. [41]

    , author Boterman, J.W

    author Van Oort, N. , author Boterman, J.W. , author Van Nes, R. , year 2012 . title The impact of scheduling on service reliability: Trip-time determination and holding points in long-headway services . journal Public Transport volume 4 , pages 39--56

    2012

  34. [42]

    , author Brands, T

    author Van Oort, N. , author Brands, T. , author De Romph, E. , year 2015 . title Short-term prediction of ridership on public transport with smart card data . journal Transportation Research Record volume 2535 , pages 105--111

    2015

  35. [43]

    , year 2012

    author Wardman, M. , year 2012 . title Review and meta-analysis of U . K . time elasticities of travel demand . journal Transportation volume 39 , pages 465--490

    2012

  36. [44]

    , author Shires, J

    author Wardman, M. , author Shires, J. , author Lythgoe, W. , author Tyler, J. , year 2004 . title Consumer benefits and demand impacts of regular train timetables , in: booktitle International Journal of Transport Management , publisher Elsevier Ltd . pp. pages 39--49

    2004

  37. [45]

    , author Be s inovi \'c , N

    author Yan, F. , author Be s inovi \'c , N. , author Goverde, R.M.P. , year 2019 . title Multi-objective periodic railway timetabling on dense heterogeneous railway corridors . journal Transportation Research Part B: Methodological volume 125 , pages 52--75

    2019

  38. [46]

    , author Li, D

    author Yang, L. , author Li, D. , author Wang, H. , author Gao, Y. , year 2024 . title Integrating stop planning, timetabling and rolling stock planning on high-speed railway lines: A multi-objective optimization approach . journal Expert Systems with Applications volume 237 ,...

    2024

  39. [47]

    , author Gao, Y

    author Yuan, J. , author Gao, Y. , author Li, S. , author Liu, P. , author Yang, L. , year 2022 . title Integrated optimization of train timetable, rolling stock assignment and short-turning strategy for a metro line . journal European Journal of Operational Research volume 30...

    2022

  40. [48]

    , author Nie, L

    author Zhang, X. , author Nie, L. , author Wu, X. , author Ke, Y. , year 2020 . title How to Optimize Train Stops under Diverse Passenger Demand : A New Line Planning Method for Large-Scale High-Speed Rail Networks . journal Networks and Spatial Economics volume 20 , pages 963--988

    2020

  41. [49]

    , author Chen, J

    author Zhao, C. , author Chen, J. , author Zhang, X. , author Wang, Z. , author Wu, P. , author Cui, Z. , year 2022 . title Fluctuating Demand-Oriented Optimization of Train Line Planning Considering Carriage Resources Transfer under Flexible Compositions . journal Applied Sci...

    2022

  42. [50]

    , author Yang, H

    author Zhao, S. , author Yang, H. , author Wu, Y. , year 2021 . title An integrated approach of train scheduling and rolling stock circulation with skip-stopping pattern for urban rail transit lines . journal Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies volume 128

    2021

  43. [51]

    , author Huang, Y

    author Zhou, W. , author Huang, Y. , author Hu, X. , author Deng, L. , author Xu, G. , year 2023 a. title A line planning approach based on time-varying demand for high-speed rail under the combined operation of periodic and aperiodic services . journal Computers & Industrial ...

    2023

  44. [52]

    , author Li, X

    author Zhou, W. , author Li, X. , author Shi, X. , year 2023 b. title Joint Optimization of Time-Dependent Line Planning and Differential Pricing with Passenger Train Choice in High-Speed Railway Networks . journal Mathematics volume 11 , pages 1290

    2023

Pith tools

Reviewed August 5, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.