We thank the Swiss Federal Railways for funding and providing data and in particular Dr. Felix Laube, Samuel Roos, Oskar Stalder, and Dr. Raimond Wüst for insightful discussions. [An extended abstract of this article has been published in the Proceedings of the ATMOS 2007 Workshop, available online at http://drops.dagstuhl.de/portals/ATMOS07.]
Periodic railway timetabling with event flexibility†
Article first published online: 24 MAR 2010
DOI: 10.1002/net.20379
Copyright © 2010 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
Issue

Networks
Special Issue: Optimization in Scheduled Transportation Networks
Volume 57, Issue 1, pages 3–18, January 2011
Additional Information
How to Cite
Caimi, G., Fuchsberger, M., Laumanns, M. and Schüpbach, K. (2011), Periodic railway timetabling with event flexibility. Networks, 57: 3–18. doi: 10.1002/net.20379
- †
Publication History
- Issue published online: 24 MAR 2010
- Article first published online: 24 MAR 2010
- Manuscript Accepted: SEP 2009
- Manuscript Received: JAN 2008
Funded by
- Swiss Federal Railways
- Abstract
- References
- Cited By
Keywords:
- train scheduling;
- timetabling;
- periodic event scheduling problem;
- flexibility
Abstract
This article addresses the problem of generating conflict-free periodic train timetables for large railway networks. We follow a two-level approach, where a simplified track topology is used to obtain a macrolevel schedule, and the detailed topology is considered locally on the microlevel. To enlarge the solution space in the interface of the two levels, we propose an extension of the well-known periodic event scheduling problem (PESP) such that it allows to generate flexible time slots for the departure and arrival times instead of exact times. This flexible periodic event scheduling problem (FPESP) formulation increases the chance to obtain feasible solutions (exact train routings) subsequently on the microlevel, in particular for stations with dense peak traffic. Total trip time and the time slot sizes are used as multiple objectives and weighted and/or constrained to allocate the flexibility where it is most useful. Tests on medium-size instances of the Swiss Federal Railways' 2007 service intention demonstrate the advantage of the FPESP model, while it only moderately increases its solution time in most cases. A trade-off analysis of the two conflicting objectives is presented and discussed for different scenarios. Finally, we present the Flexbox model, which generalizes the single event flexibilities of the FPESP to arbitrary subsets of events. These Flexboxes can make use of natural dependencies in the timetable and can considerably increase the total flexibility of the timetable. © 2010 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. NETWORKS, 2011

1097-0037/asset/NET_centre.gif?v=1&s=3b4a007baeb0bb143afbd4cdc905958e631876aa)