| Literature DB >> 31881726 |
Zhenwei Luo1, Yu Zhang1, Lin Li1,2, Biao He3, Chengming Li4, Haihong Zhu1,2, Wei Wang1, Shen Ying1,2, Yuliang Xi1.
Abstract
Traffic congestion, especially during peak hours, has become a challenge for transportation systems in many metropolitan areas, and such congestion causes delays and negative effects for passengers. Many studies have examined the prediction of congestion; however, these studies focus mainly on road traffic, and subway transit, which is the main form of transportation in densely populated cities, such as Tokyo, Paris, and Beijing and Shenzhen in China, has seldom been examined. This study takes Shenzhen as a case study for predicting congestion in a subway system during peak hours and proposes a hybrid method that combines a static traffic assignment model with an agent-based dynamic traffic simulation model to estimate recurrent congestion in this subway system. The homes and work places of the residents in this city are collected and taken to represent the traffic demand for the subway system of Shenzhen. An origin-destination (OD) matrix derived from the data is used as an input in this method of predicting traffic, and the traffic congestion is presented in simulations. To evaluate the predictions, data on the congestion condition of subway segments that are released daily by the Shenzhen metro operation microblog are used as a reference, and a comparative analysis indicates the appropriateness of the proposed method. This study could be taken as an example for similar studies that model subway traffic in other cities.Entities:
Keywords: agent-based simulation; congestion; origin-destination (OD) matrix; subway; traffic model
Year: 2019 PMID: 31881726 PMCID: PMC6982792 DOI: 10.3390/s20010150
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sensors (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8220 Impact factor: 3.576
Figure 1Traffic simulation framework architecture diagram.
Figure 2Simulation workflow.
Figure 3(a) A sample subway network with eight nodes and seven edges. (b) Passenger flow network with eight nodes and 14 directed edges.
Figure 4Study area.
Passenger flow volume and annual change for major modes of transportation.
| 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 | 2017 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 2201.78 (−3.56%) | 2257.39 (2.53%) | 2068.92 (−8.35%) | 1867.99 (−9.71%) | 1654.25 (−11.44%) |
|
| 432.30 (+5.99%) | 438.42 (1.42%) | 391.13 (−10.79%) | 373.62 (−4.48%) | 370.8 (−0.76%) |
|
| 917.15 (+17.39%) | 1036.75 (+13.04%) | 1121.88 (+8.21%) | 1297.13 (+15.62%) | 1655.45 (+27.62%) |
Passenger flow volume unit: million trips.
Information on the subway lines of Shenzhen.
| Subway Route | Originating Station | Terminal Station | Stations | Length (km) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Line 1 | Luohu | Airport East | 30 | 41.0 |
| Line 2 | Chiwan | Xinxiu | 29 | 35.7 |
| Line 3 | Suanglong | Yitian | 30 | 41.7 |
| Line 4 | Futian Checkpoint | Qinghu | 15 | 20.5 |
| Line 5 | Qianhaiwan | Huangbeiling | 27 | 40.0 |
| Line 7 | Xili Lake | Tai’an | 28 | 30.1 |
| Line 9 | Hongshuwan South | Wenjin | 22 | 25.4 |
| Line 11 | Futian | Bitou | 18 | 51.9 |
Figure 5Diagram showing the structure of the subway network of Shenzhen.
Figure 6Locations of the homes of selected citizens.
Figure 7Locations of the workplaces of selected citizens.
Figure 8OD distribution of a sample passenger.
Figure 9Possible travel routes of a sample passenger.
Operation parameters of the Shenzhen subway system.
| Subway Line | Peak Interval (7:30–9:00) | Common Interval |
| Marshalling |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Line 1 | 2 min | 4 min | 60 | 6A | 2502 |
| Line 2 | 3.5 min | 5 min | 38 | 6A | 2502 |
| Line 3 | 3 min | 5 min | 42 | 6B | 1800 |
| Line 4 | 2.5 min | 5 min | 48 | 6A | 2502 |
| Line 5 | 3.5 min | 5 min | 38 | 6A | 2502 |
| Line 7 | 5 min | 8 min | 26 | 6A | 2502 |
| Line 9 | 5 min | 8 min | 26 | 6A | 2502 |
| Line 11 | 5 min | 8.5 min | 26 | 8A | 2564 |
Figure 10Predicted degree of congestion of subway segments.
Figure A1Diagram showing congestion during the morning peak hours on 12 May 2017. Green: smooth, Orange: crowded, Red: congested.
Statistical congestion information.
| Segment ID | Segment | Congested (D1) | Crowded (D2) | Smooth (D3) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1-1 | Science Museum to Huaqiang Road | 0 | 2 | 13 |
| 1-2 | Convention and Exhibition Center to Shopping Park | 0 | 5 | 10 |
| 1-3 | Shopping Park to Xiangmihu | 0 | 5 | 10 |
| 1-4 | Xiangmihu to Chegongmiao | 0 | 2 | 13 |
| 1-5 | Shenzhen University to Taoyuan | 1 | 3 | 11 |
| 1-6 | Taoyuan to Daxin | 1 | 3 | 11 |
| 1-7 | Liyumen to Qianhaiwan | 0 | 2 | 13 |
| 2-1 | Grand Theater to Hubei | 0 | 3 | 12 |
| 2-2 | Hubei to Huangbeiling | 0 | 2 | 13 |
| 3-1 | Tangkeng to Liuyue | 0 | 2 | 13 |
| 3-2 | Liuyue to Danzhutou | 0 | 2 | 13 |
| 3-3 | Danzhutou to Dafen | 0 | 12 | 3 |
| 3-4 | Dafen to Mumianwan | 5 | 8 | 2 |
| 3-5 | Mumianwan to Buji | 11 | 3 | 1 |
| 3-6 | Buji to Caopu | 11 | 3 | 1 |
| 3-7 | Caopu to Shuibei | 13 | 1 | 1 |
| 3-8 | Shuibei to Tianbei | 11 | 4 | 0 |
| 3-9 | Tianbei to Cuizhu | 13 | 2 | 0 |
| 3-10 | Cuizhu to Shaibu | 12 | 3 | 0 |
| 3-11 | Shaibu to Laojie | 13 | 1 | 1 |
| 4-1 | Longhua to Longsheng | 0 | 2 | 13 |
| 4-2 | Longsheng to Shangtang | 1 | 4 | 10 |
| 4-3 | Shangtang to Hongshan | 5 | 2 | 8 |
| 4-4 | Hongshan to Shenzhen North | 3 | 3 | 9 |
| 4-5 | Shenzhen North to Baishilong | 1 | 4 | 10 |
| 4-6 | Baishilong to Minle | 5 | 5 | 5 |
| 4-7 | Minle to Shangmeilin | 7 | 1 | 7 |
| 4-8 | Shangmeilin to Lianhua North | 9 | 1 | 5 |
| 4-9 | Lianhua North to Children’s Palace | 8 | 2 | 5 |
| 4-10 | Children’s Palace to Civic Center | 0 | 10 | 5 |
| 4-11 | Civic Center to Convention and Exhibition Center | 0 | 9 | 6 |
| 7-1 | Xili to Chaguang | 0 | 2 | 13 |
| 7-2 | Chaguang to Zhuguang | 0 | 3 | 12 |
| 7-3 | Zhuguang to Longjing | 0 | 3 | 12 |
| 7-4 | Longjing to Taoyuancun | 0 | 4 | 11 |
| 7-5 | Taoyuancun to Shenyun | 0 | 10 | 5 |
| 7-6 | Shenyun to Antuo Hill | 0 | 10 | 5 |
| 9-1 | Jingtian to Meijing | 0 | 3 | 12 |
| 11-1 | Hongshuwan South to Houhai | 0 | 3 | 12 |
| 11-2 | Houhai to Nanshan | 1 | 11 | 3 |
| 11-3 | Nanshan to Qianhaiwan | 1 | 10 | 4 |
| 11-4 | Qianhaiwan to Bao’an | 1 | 11 | 3 |
| 11-5 | Bao’an to Bihaiwan | 1 | 6 | 8 |
| 11-6 | Bihaiwan to Airport | 0 | 4 | 11 |
| 11-7 | Airport to Airport North | 0 | 3 | 12 |
| 11-8 | Airport North to Fuyong | 0 | 3 | 12 |
Figure 11Reference degree of congestion of the subway segments.
Comparison between actual and predicted results.
| Subway Route | Reference Segments | Predicted Segments | Number of Matches | Matching Ratio | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Congested | Crowded | Smooth | Congested | Crowded | Smooth | |||
| Line 1 | 0 | 0 | 29 | 0 | 0 | 29 | 29/29 | 1.000 |
| Line 2 | 0 | 0 | 28 | 0 | 1 | 27 | 27/28 | 0.964 |
| Line 3 | 9 | 0 | 20 | 7 | 8 | 14 | 21/29 | 0.724 |
| Line 4 | 0 | 5 | 9 | 0 | 0 | 14 | 9/14 | 0.642 |
| Line 5 | 0 | 0 | 26 | 0 | 1 | 25 | 25/26 | 0.962 |
| Line 7 | 0 | 5 | 22 | 3 | 18 | 6 | 9/27 | 0.333 |
| Line 9 | 0 | 1 | 20 | 1 | 6 | 14 | 15/21 | 0.714 |
| Line 11 | 0 | 8 | 9 | 0 | 6 | 11 | 14/17 | 0.824 |
| Total | 9 | 19 | 163 | 11 | 40 | 140 | 149/191 | 0.780 |
Figure 12Comparison of reference and predicted congestion results for Line 3.
Figure 13Comparison of reference and predicted congestion results for Line 11.
Figure 14Comparison of reference and predicted congestion results for Line 4.
Figure 15Comparison of reference and predicted congestion results for Line 7.