Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 5 minor 34 references

Predict-then-Optimize Framework for Public Transport Line Redesign under Fluctuating Traffic Conditions

T0 review · 2 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Proactive redesign of bus lines, triggered by traffic forecasts, can improve average travel time on the Beijing network by up to 25.8 percent while preserving full origin–destination connectivity.

desk verdict A genuinely useful extension of the authors' adaptive-route work, with a coherent multiobjective formulation and a real Beijing case, but the headline gains rest on an i.i.d. link-time noise model that likely inflates the rerouting benefit under real correlated congestion. read the letter →

arxiv 2608.11405 v1 pith:4JQP2MVB submitted 2026-08-11 math.OC

Zihao Guo , Andrea Araldo , Faycal Touzout , Mounim El-Yacoubi This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.OC MSC 90B0690B2090C29
keywords publictransportnetworkredesignpredict-then-optimizeNSGA-IIImulti-objectiveoptimizationtraveltimeuncertaintyJaccardsimilaritytrafficforecastingresilience
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 claims that public transport networks need not stay frozen under heavy traffic: with an hour-ahead forecast of link travel times, a multi-objective optimizer can redraw parts of the line topology and reallocate buses for the next hour, and the benefit grows as traffic variability grows. On the Beijing network at the highest variability tested, the redesigned network improves average travel time by up to 25.8% and cuts operating cost by up to 22.6% while keeping more than 85% of the original line edges and preserving every origin–destination pair. On Mandl's benchmark, the redesign improves travel time by at least 20% for about 30% of OD pairs at high variability, roughly double the share reached by frequency-only adjustment. A sympathetic reader would take this as evidence that continuous, adaptive line redesign deserves to be part of operational practice, not just strategic planning.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing mechanism is the predict-then-optimize cycle with a structural-continuity objective. A trigger rule compares the average absolute deviation of predicted link times from nominal values against a tolerance; if the deviation exceeds it, an NSGA-III evolutionary search—a reference-point-based many-objective algorithm—evolves line paths and vehicle counts, and passenger travel times are induced by shortest paths on a virtual-node graph that adds waiting and transfer costs. The Jaccard index between original and redesigned edge sets appears both as an optimization objective and as a reporting metric, and a proposition shows that high Jaccard similarity to the original bounds the similarity between any two redesigns across time slots, which is what makes rolling multi-hour deployment plausible.

What would settle it

Rerun the Beijing experiments feeding the optimizer forecast errors that are spatially correlated, such as one common congestion shock over a corridor, or errors measured directly on the same bus links, and compare realized travel-time gains at cv=1. If the average improvement falls below the static baseline or line overlap drops below the promised level, the central claim fails. A second, simpler check is to run the trigger rule over a multi-hour rolling horizon and verify that consecutive redesigned networks satisfy the promised cross-time overlap bound, a deployment step the paper does not currently test.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that a forecast-triggered redesign loop converts short-term traffic predictions into bus networks that outperform static planning and reactive control precisely when conditions are bad. Link travel times are modeled as log-normal with a chosen coefficient of variation, and forecast inaccuracy is injected by sampling residuals from a trained deep-learning traffic predictor, so the optimizer sees noisy predictions while scores are computed on realized times. The three objectives are passenger travel-time deterioration relative to the original network, total vehicle-hours, and line dissimilarity measured by Jaccard overlap. Under this setup the method beats frequency-only adjustment on Mandl and stop-skipping on Beijing, and unlike stop-skipping it never disconnects OD pairs.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that sampling forecast errors independently from a generic empirical pool learned on other road networks faithfully represents the prediction error a real bus network experiences; if actual errors are larger, spatially correlated, or link-specific, the reported gains may not transfer.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Transit agencies could treat line topology as a per-hour operational decision, activated by forecasts, instead of a fixed strategic asset.
  • The trigger threshold prevents disruptive redesigns when traffic is close to nominal, so passengers only face changes when they buy real improvements.
  • Because the redesigned network preserves full OD connectivity and at least 85% line overlap on Beijing, the framework answers the main objection to reactive tactics like stop-skipping: it does not trade connectivity for speed.
  • Gains increase with variability, so the value of the approach is largest under the conditions where static planning fails most.
  • Even without variability, the optimization recovers 11.4% on Beijing by re-optimizing an incumbent network, suggesting part of the benefit comes from fixing accumulated static inefficiency, with adaptation adding on top.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The paper itself tests a single decision slot; a natural next test is a rolling multi-hour simulation using the trigger rule, checking whether realized gains and Jaccard overlap hold across consecutive redesigns.
  • If forecast errors were given realistic spatial correlation—a congestion shock hitting adjacent links at once—redesigns might need to be more conservative; rerunning with correlated residuals would show whether the 25.8% figure is robust.
  • The same predict-then-optimize structure is transferable to other scheduled networks, such as rail, ferry, or school transport, where link times fluctuate and line structures can be re-issued hourly.
  • In cities where passengers cannot rely on live navigation apps or where regulations constrain route changes, the reported gains should be read as upper bounds rather than expected deployment values.
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

2 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a predict-then-optimize framework for proactively redesigning public transport line topologies and fleet allocations under fluctuating traffic conditions. The optimization problem minimizes passenger travel-time deterioration, operational cost, and line-structure dissimilarity (via a Jaccard index), and is solved with NSGA-III. The evaluation uses Mandl's benchmark and a large-scale Beijing bus network, with realized link travel times drawn from log-normal distributions calibrated by median and coefficient of variation, and predicted times constructed by adding empirical log-relative prediction errors sampled from DCRNN residuals (trained on METR-LA for Mandl and Q-Traffic for Beijing). The reported results show average travel-time improvements up to 25.8% on the Beijing network at high variability (cv=1) while preserving over 85% line overlap, and the method is compared against static baselines and a stop-skipping baseline.

Significance. If the results hold, the paper offers a novel and practically motivated contribution to adaptive transit network design: it combines short-term traffic forecasts with multi-objective network redesign, explicitly controls structural stability through a Jaccard-based objective, and evaluates the impact of forecast errors drawn from an established deep-learning predictor. The formulation is internally consistent, the single-slot evaluation cleanly separates prediction from realized performance, Proposition 2 is proved, and the authors are transparent about the main limitations. The paper also commits to releasing code and instances, which supports reproducibility. However, the headline quantitative claims rest on a synthetic stochastic environment whose link-level independence is a known simplification; this is the main external-validity risk and must be addressed before the claims can be taken as evidence for real deployment.

major comments (2)
  1. [§5.1, §5.2.2, App. B.3, Table 5] The headline Beijing result (25.8% average travel-time improvement at cv=1, Table 5) is established under a stochastic environment in which realized link times are drawn independently from log-normal distributions calibrated only by median and coefficient of variation, and forecast errors are sampled independently from a pooled residual pool. As the paper itself states (App. B.3), this model 'abstracts away the spatial and temporal correlation of real forecast errors.' Real traffic congestion is strongly spatially correlated—slow corridors, incidents, and peak spreading affect many adjacent links simultaneously—so the mechanism invoked in §6.3 ('vehicles can bypass congested corridors') may be substantially weaker when slow links are correlated rather than isolated single-link outliers. This is a load-bearing external-validity threat to the central claim. I request either (a) an additional experiment with a spatially correlated travel-time/error field (e.g., a positive spatial covariance structure or a corridor-level shock model) reporting the same metrics, or (b) a substantial reframing of the abstract and §6.3 so that the claims are explicitly conditional on an i.i.d. log-normal environment, with the correlation caveat moved from App. B.3 into the main text and abstract.
  2. [§5.2.1, App. B.2, Table 6] The forecast-error model is transferred across networks and modes: DCRNN is trained on METR-LA (a highway sensor network) for Mandl, and on Q-Traffic for Beijing. The paper states this 'does not affect the methodological validity of the presented approach,' but the numerical magnitude of the reported gains depends on the error distribution's scale and structure. The α-sensitivity analysis in App. D.1 was performed only on Mandl and holds the realized times fixed; it does not verify that the METR-LA/Q-Traffic error magnitudes (Table 6, MAE 3.590 and 3.932, units not specified) are representative of bus travel-time forecasts on the target networks, nor does it explore the effect on Beijing. I ask that the authors either provide an α-sensitivity or error-magnitude analysis for the Beijing case, or clearly state in the main text that the reported absolute gains are conditional on the transferred error model and should not be read as a deployment-level prediction.
minor comments (5)
  1. [§6.1.3] The word 'mtric' appears in the description of the IS20 metric; it should be corrected to 'metric.'
  2. [Table 5] The metrics 'Unreach. OD' and 'Unserv. Dem.' are reported but never formally defined in the text; the authors should add definitions, including whether the stop-skipping TTI is computed only over the reachable OD pairs.
  3. [Table 6] The MAE and RMSE values in Table 6 are reported without units; since they are used to justify the error model, the units (e.g., speed units) and the conversion to log-relative travel-time residuals should be stated explicitly.
  4. [§6.1.1] The text says 'we use two dynamic benchmarks' but frequency-only is applied only to Mandl and stop-skipping only to Beijing; please clarify this asymmetry in the presentation.
  5. [§7] The conclusion states that the results 'indicate the potential of transitioning from static planning toward continuous and adaptive PT network design,' but the experiments evaluate a single decision slot, not the rolling trigger of Rule 1. The authors should either soften this statement or explicitly note that the multi-period behavior remains unvalidated.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the optimization is scored on realized times independent of the forecast input; the only self-citations are non-load-bearing research-gap framing.

full rationale

I walked the derivation chain from Eqs. (5)-(14) through Rule 1 and the evaluation protocol. The optimizer receives predicted link times \(\hat t_{ij}\) and outputs a design; performance is then evaluated on realized times \(t_{ij}^{\omega}\) generated independently in §5.1 (Eq. 20), so the reported gains are not constructed from the forecast input. The error pool is external and pretrained on METR-LA/Q-Traffic (App. B.2), not fitted to the target networks' outcomes; Prop. 3 is only a standard lognormal median-CV parameterization. The paper itself flags the main limitation: 'because errors are sampled independently for each link and scenario, this first-order model abstracts away the spatial and temporal correlation of real forecast errors' (App. B.3), and §7 lists correlation-aware errors as future work—this is an external-validity caveat, not a circular reduction. Self-citations to Guo et al. [2024, 2025] appear only in the reactive-control and research-gap discussion and do not carry any of the paper's quantitative claims. No equation equals its input by construction, and no fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction. The score reflects one minor non-load-bearing self-citation in the framing; the central derivation is self-contained.

Assumptions & free parameters 6 free parameters · 8 assumptions · 0 invented entities

All scenario parameters and constants are either standard values from prior literature or swept axes, not fitted to the reported outcome. The load-bearing assumptions are the synthetic log-normal travel times and the transferred forecast-error distribution, which determine the quantitative results.

free parameters (6)
  • Coefficient of variation levels = 0.05, 0.25, 0.5, 1.0
    Swept scenario parameter defining traffic variability; not fitted to target data.
  • Prediction-error scale alpha = 1.0 in main experiments; stress tests up to 1.5
    Multiplier on empirical log-relative forecast errors; chosen to match DCRNN error level and to stress test, not fitted.
  • Fixed dwell time = 1 minute
    Constant dwell time per stop taken from prior literature (Chen et al. 2022); not fitted.
  • Transfer penalty = 5 minutes
    Standard transfer penalty from Baaj and Mahmassani 1991; not fitted.
  • Fleet caps = Vmax=40 for Mandl, 150 for Beijing
    Booking caps following Ahern et al. 2022 and a constant 12-minute headway; not fitted.
  • Similarity threshold Jmin = 0.5
    Minimum Jaccard similarity in population initialization; algorithmic choice, not fitted.
assumptions (8)
  • domain assumption Log-normal travel time distribution with prescribed median and coefficient of variation (Prop. 3, Section 5.1)
    Realized link times are synthetic; no evidence this matches real travel time distributions on Mandl or Beijing bus links.
  • ad hoc to paper Forecast errors trained on METR-LA transfer to Mandl's network, and Q-Traffic errors transfer to Beijing bus network (Section 5.2.1)
    Mandl has no traffic data, so a Los Angeles highway error model is used as a proxy; transferability is asserted, not validated.
  • domain assumption Forecast errors are independent across links and scenarios, sampled with replacement from a pooled residual set (Section 5.2.2, App B.3)
    This abstracts away spatial and temporal correlation; the paper acknowledges this and defers correlation-aware errors to future work.
  • domain assumption Passenger routing is deterministic shortest path on an uncongested network without capacity or crowding effects (Observation 1, Section 3.3)
    Travel time gains are uncongested user-optimal gains; capacity constraints and behavioral heterogeneity are excluded.
  • domain assumption Fixed dwell time and 5-minute transfer penalty (Section 3.1)
    Standard simplifications at network design level; they affect absolute travel times but not the comparative direction of results.
  • domain assumption Every trip is shorter than one hour, so the announced route remains valid for the whole journey (Section 3)
    Needed for the one-hour-ahead reconfiguration protocol; can fail for long trips.
  • domain assumption NSGA-III with the stated parameters produces a useful approximation of the Pareto front (Section 4, App C)
    Heuristic method with no optimality guarantee; the algorithm comparison covers only NSGA-II and two NSVND variants.
  • standard math Jaccard distance satisfies the triangle inequality (Proposition 2, App A)
    Standard metric property used for the pairwise stability bound.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Predict-then-Optimize Framework for Public Transport Line Redesign under Fluctuating Traffic Conditions." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/4JQP2MVB

@misc{pith2026260811405,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Predict-then-Optimize Framework for Public Transport Line Redesign under Fluctuating Traffic Conditions},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/4JQP2MVB}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2608.11405}
}
read the original abstract

Public Transport (PT) lines are traditionally designed to optimize performance under nominal traffic conditions. In practice, operating conditions frequently deviate from nominal ones, leading to substantial performance deterioration. Existing adaptation mechanisms typically rely on reactive interventions, such as stop-skipping, which are insufficient under large or recurrent traffic fluctuations. In such contexts, incremental adjustments may not suffice. This paper evaluates the potential of deeper structural redesigns to preserve performance. We propose a method to proactively redesign appropriate parts of PT networks under high traffic fluctuations that would otherwise deteriorate operator and user performance. We adopt a predict-then-optimize paradigm in which PT lines are reconfigured based on traffic forecasts using the Non-dominated Sorting Genetic Algorithm III (NSGA-III). To ensure operational feasibility and avoid excessive structural changes, we enforce high Jaccard edge overlap between the original and redesigned networks. To assess prediction inaccuracies, we construct a statistical model of errors from a well-established deep learning predictor, the Diffusion Convolutional Recurrent Neural Network, trained on real-world data. Computational results on Mandl's benchmark and the large-scale Beijing network show that controlled PT line redesign yields substantial user-centric performance gains and operational cost reductions under high traffic fluctuations while limiting topological changes. On the Beijing network under high variability, average travel time improves by up to 25.8% while preserving over 85% line overlap. Unlike stop-skipping baselines, which break connectivity for many OD pairs, our redesign preserves full OD connectivity. These results support a shift from static planning toward continuous and adaptive PT network design.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2608.11405 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Proactive Line Redesign Framework. with each hℓ defined as the time interval between two consecutive vehicles [Vuchic, Clarke, and Molinero, 1981]. Accordingly, GPT can be viewed as a line-labeled directed multigraph for modeling purposes, while operationally each line provides bidirectional service along its physical path. For each PT line ℓ ∈ L, headway h ℓ can be calculated by h ℓ = T ℓ nℓ , where T ℓ represents … view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Example of a four-station PT network with asymmetric routes. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Flowchart of the Proposed NSGA-III-based optimization method. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (6 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Trip Time Distribution Comparison Under Various Variability Conditions in a randomly chosen realization. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Travel-time, cost (Z1, Z2) Pareto fronts for the 4-line Mandl instance under four travel-time variability levels. 6.2.4 Forecast-error Sensitivity We now test whether the proposed proactive redesign is driven by the intrinsic variability of link travel times rather tha…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Adapted Beijing PT networks under low (cv = 0) and high (cv = 1) travel-time variability. Additional variability levels are shown in App. E. We now move the analysis to the real Beijing network. The original and adjusted PT networks are shown in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figur…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Hypervolume-based forecast value on the Mandl redesign (mean over 30 seeds): (a) headroom available from [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p034_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Trimmed-mean exceedance probability curves of OD-level improvement rates under different line quantities [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p035_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Beijing PT networks: original design and adapted networks under [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p036_9.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

34 extracted references · 22 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    adds complete Pareto fronts F1 throughFl−1 sequentially; for the last frontFl, slots are filled by prioritizing solutions associated with reference points that have fewer assigned solutions to ensure diversity. Algorithm 2Feasibility-Oriented Path Completion for Line Repair Input:Substrate graphG= (N,E), endpoints(u,v), visited node setV ℓ used Output:Con...

    work page arXiv 2015

  2. [2]

    Equating this expression with the prescribed value ofcvgives cv2 = exp(σ2)−1 =⇒σ 2 = ln 1 +cv 2 =⇒σ= q ln 1 +cv 2

    exp(µ+ 1 2σ2) = p exp(σ2)−1. Equating this expression with the prescribed value ofcvgives cv2 = exp(σ2)−1 =⇒σ 2 = ln 1 +cv 2 =⇒σ= q ln 1 +cv 2 . ■ B.2 Traffic Speed Prediction and Error Estimation To generate realistic stochastic prediction errors, we employ the Diffusion Convolutional Recurrent Neural Network (DCRNN) [Li et al., 2017] to model spatiotemp...

    work page 2017

  3. [4]

    URL https://www.tandfonline.co m/doi/abs/10.1080/23789689.2024.2346705

    doi:10.1080/23789689.2024.2346705. URL https://www.tandfonline.co m/doi/abs/10.1080/23789689.2024.2346705. João Francisco Pimentel Fonseca.Timetable Integration in Public Transport Planning. PhD thesis, Technical University of Denmark (DTU),

    arXiv 2024

  4. [12]

    Optimizing transit network departure frequency considering congestion effects.Journal of Advanced Transportation, 2024(1):8131887,

    Wei Tan, Xiaodong Peng, Jun Huang, Yuwen Wang, Jiandong Qiu, and Xiaobo Liu. Optimizing transit network departure frequency considering congestion effects.Journal of Advanced Transportation, 2024(1):8131887,

    work page 2024

  5. [13]

    Restoring accessibility during urban rail disruptions via bus network redesign.arXiv preprint arXiv:2411.08782,

    Zihao Guo, Andrea Araldo, and Mounîm A El Yacoubi. Restoring accessibility during urban rail disruptions via bus network redesign.arXiv preprint arXiv:2411.08782,

    work page arXiv

  6. [15]

    Optimization of bus rerouting to alleviate the impact of rail transit construction.Journal of Advanced Transportation, 2022(1):5773362,

    Yiran Wang, Jingxu Chen, Xinlian Yu, Qinhe An, and Xu Wu. Optimization of bus rerouting to alleviate the impact of rail transit construction.Journal of Advanced Transportation, 2022(1):5773362,

    work page 2022

  7. [16]

    Riccardo Massobrio and Oded Cats

    doi:10.1007/s12469-022-00301-8. Riccardo Massobrio and Oded Cats. Topological assessment of recoverability in public transport networks.Communi- cations Physics, 7:108,

    work page doi:10.1007/s12469-022-00301-8

  8. [17]

    Han Pu, Yinzhen Li, and Changxi Ma

    doi:10.1038/s42005-024-01596-8. Han Pu, Yinzhen Li, and Changxi Ma. Topology analysis of lanzhou public transport network based on double-layer complex network theory.Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, 592:126694,

    work page doi:10.1038/s42005-024-01596-8

Show all 34 references
  1. [18]

    Giovanni Calabrò, Michela Le Pira, Nadia Giuffrida, Giuseppe Inturri, Matteo Ignaccolo, and Gonçalo H de A Correia

    doi:10.1016/j.ejtl.2021.100050. Giovanni Calabrò, Michela Le Pira, Nadia Giuffrida, Giuseppe Inturri, Matteo Ignaccolo, and Gonçalo H de A Correia. Fixed-route vs. demand-responsive transport feeder services: An exploratory study using an agent-based model. Journal of Advanced...

    2021

  2. [19]

    doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijtst.2021.05.003

    ISSN 2046-0430. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijtst.2021.05.003. URL https://www.sciencedirect.com/scie nce/article/pii/S204604302100037X. Zhiwei Chen, Xiaopeng Li, and Xiaobo Qu. A continuous model for designing corridor systems with modular autonomous vehicles enabling stati...

    2021 doi

  3. [20]

    URLhttps://doi.org/10.1287/trsc.2021.1085

    doi:10.1287/trsc.2021.1085. URLhttps://doi.org/10.1287/trsc.2021.1085. Anita Schöbel and Reena Urban. The cheapest ticket problem in public transport.Transportation Science, 56(6): 1432–1451,

    2021

  4. [22]

    Office of the New York State Comptroller

    doi:10.1007/s12469-009-0011-z. Office of the New York State Comptroller. Trends in new york city subway delays. Technical Report Report 10-2026, Office of the New York State Comptroller, September

    2026 doi

  5. [25]

    Diffusion convolutional recurrent neural network: Data-driven traffic forecasting.arXiv preprint arXiv:1707.01926,

    Yaguang Li, Rose Yu, Cyrus Shahabi, and Yan Liu. Diffusion convolutional recurrent neural network: Data-driven traffic forecasting.arXiv preprint arXiv:1707.01926,

    arXiv

  6. [27]

    An exact solution approach for the bus line planning problem with integrated passenger routing.Journal of Advanced Transportation, 2021(1):6684795,

    Evert Vermeir, Wouter Engelen, Johan Philips, and Pieter Vansteenwegen. An exact solution approach for the bus line planning problem with integrated passenger routing.Journal of Advanced Transportation, 2021(1):6684795,

    2021

  7. [30]

    Performance metrics in multi-objective optimization

    Nery Riquelme, Christian V on Lücken, and Benjamin Baran. Performance metrics in multi-objective optimization. In 2015 Latin American computing conference (CLEI), pages 1–11. IEEE,

    2015

  8. [33]

    Table 6 reports the one-hour-ahead prediction errors used in our experiments

    and Lu, Lv, Xie, Du, Xiong, Sun, and Wang [2022], respectively: We train each prediction model on the first part of the chronologically ordered data and measure prediction errors on the last part, i.e., the test set. Table 6 reports the one-hour-ahead prediction errors used in...

    2022

  9. [1901]

    An analytical approach to the jaccard similarity index

    Gonzalo Travieso, Alexandre Benatti, and Luciano da F Costa. An analytical approach to the jaccard similarity index. arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.16436,

    arXiv

  10. [1986]

    Valérie Guihaire and Jin-Kao Hao

    doi:10.1016/0191-2615(86)90047-0. Valérie Guihaire and Jin-Kao Hao. Transit network design and scheduling: A global review.Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 42(10):1251–1273,

    doi

  11. [1991]

    Dong Zhao, Adriana-Simona Mih ˘ai¸ t˘a, Yuming Ou, Hanna Grzybowska, and Mo Li

    doi:10.1002/atr.5670250205. Dong Zhao, Adriana-Simona Mih ˘ai¸ t˘a, Yuming Ou, Hanna Grzybowska, and Mo Li. Origin–destination matrix estimation for public transport: A multi-modal weighted graph approach.Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, 165:104694,

    doi

  12. [2001]

    The Jaccard distance between two setsXandYis dJ(X,Y) = 1− |X∩Y| |X∪Y| = 1−J(X,Y)

    A Proof and Discussion of Proposition 2 Proof.SettingA=E (k),B=E (0), andC=E (k+n). The Jaccard distance between two setsXandYis dJ(X,Y) = 1− |X∩Y| |X∪Y| = 1−J(X,Y). Levandowsky and Winter [Levandowsky and Winter, 1971] noted that this dissimilarity measure satisfies the trian...

    1971

  13. [2007]

    Avishai Ceder.Public Transit Planning and Operation: Modeling, Practice and Behavior

    doi:10.1016/S0927-0507(06)14002-5. Avishai Ceder.Public Transit Planning and Operation: Modeling, Practice and Behavior. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, 2nd edition,

    doi

  14. [2008]

    Konstantinos Kepaptsoglou and Matthew Karlaftis

    doi:10.1016/j.tra.2008.03.011. Konstantinos Kepaptsoglou and Matthew Karlaftis. Transit route network design problem: Review.Journal of Transportation Engineering, 135(8):491–505,

    2008 doi

  15. [2009]

    Javier Durán-Micco and Pieter Vansteenwegen

    doi:10.1061/(ASCE)0733-947X(2009)135:8(491). Javier Durán-Micco and Pieter Vansteenwegen. A survey on the transit network design and frequency setting problem. Public transport, 14(1):155–190,

    2009 doi

  16. [2011]

    Rafael H

    doi:10.3141/2263-17. Rafael H. M. Pereira, Tim Schwanen, and David Banister. Distributive justice and equity in transportation.Transport Reviews, 37(2):170–191,

    doi

  17. [2014]

    Younes Guessous, Maurice Aron, Neila Bhouri, and Simon Cohen

    doi:10.1109/TEVC.2013.2281535. Younes Guessous, Maurice Aron, Neila Bhouri, and Simon Cohen. Estimating travel time distribution under different traffic conditions.Transportation Research Procedia, 3:339–348,

    2013

  18. [2015]

    Avishai Ceder and Nigel H

    doi:10.1016/j.tra.2015.04.003. Avishai Ceder and Nigel H. M. Wilson. Bus network design.Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, 20(4): 331–344,

    2015 doi

  19. [2017]

    Michael Levandowsky and David Winter

    doi:10.1080/01441647.2016.1257660. Michael Levandowsky and David Winter. Distance between sets.Nature, 234(5323):34–35,

    2016

  20. [2019]

    Daniel J

    URLhttps://arxiv.org/abs/1902.09745. Daniel J. Fagnant and Kara M. Kockelman. Preparing a nation for autonomous vehicles: Opportunities, bar- riers and policy recommendations.Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 77:167–181,

    1902 arXiv

  21. [2020]

    Beda Büchel and Francesco Corman

    URLhttps://orbit.dtu.dk/files/206223149/Thesis_JFPF.pdf. Beda Büchel and Francesco Corman. Review on statistical modeling of travel time variability for road-based public transport.Frontiers in Built Environment, 6:70, 2020b. doi:10.3389/fbuil.2020.00070. URL https://www.front...

  22. [2021]

    URL https://repository.tudelft.nl/file/File_d117b4dc- 8cb c-4286-8f32-d9829ca3a273

    doi:10.1016/j.tre.2020.102176. URL https://repository.tudelft.nl/file/File_d117b4dc- 8cb c-4286-8f32-d9829ca3a273. S.M.H. Mahdavi and N. Bhouri. A synthetic indicator for structuring resilient public transport operation.Sustainable and Resilient Infrastructure,

    2020

  23. [2022]

    Jing-Quan Li, Myoung Kyun Song, Meng Li, Wei-Bin Zhang, and Mark Miller

    doi:10.1016/j.tra.2022.08.006. Jing-Quan Li, Myoung Kyun Song, Meng Li, Wei-Bin Zhang, and Mark Miller. Evaluation of cost-effective planning and design options for bus rapid transit in dedicated bus lanes

    2022 doi

  24. [2023]

    Optimal adjustment schemes on the long through-type bus lines considering the urban rail transit network.Discrete Dynamics in Nature and Society, 2018(1):8029137, 2018a

    Si-Jia Zhang, Shun-Ping Jia, Yun Bai, Bao-Hua Mao, Cun-Rui Ma, and Tong Zhang. Optimal adjustment schemes on the long through-type bus lines considering the urban rail transit network.Discrete Dynamics in Nature and Society, 2018(1):8029137, 2018a. Wenliang Zhou, Panpan Hu, Yu...

    2018

  25. [2024]

    International Transport Forum (ITF)

    URL https://www.oecd.org/content/dam/oecd/en/publications/reports/2024/0 5/transport-system-resilience_f51c36d9/d90b86ac-en.pdf. International Transport Forum (ITF). Transport network resilience: Policy paper. Technical report, OECD/ITF,

    2024

  26. [2025]

    Office of the New York City Comptroller

    URL https://www.osc.ny.gov/files/reports/p df/report-10-2026.pdf. Office of the New York City Comptroller. The human cost of subway delays: A survey of new york city riders. Technical report, Office of the New York City Comptroller, July

    2026

Pith tools

Reviewed August 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.