You are on page 1of 6

Proceedings of the IEEE ITSC 2006

2006 IEEE Intelligent Transportation Systems Conference


Toronto, Canada, September 17-20, 2006

WA2.4

Path-based System Optimal Dynamic Trafc Assignment Models:


Formulations and Solution Methods
Wei Shen, Yu Nie, and H. Michael Zhang
Abstract The evaluation of path marginal cost, i.e., the
gradient of the objective function with respect to path ows,
lies in the kernel of solution algorithms for path-based SODTA models. We identify a common critical deciency in
existing path marginal cost evaluation methods, develop a
new path marginal cost evaluation method by tracing path
ow perturbation propagations and design the corresponding
solution algorithm for path-based SO-DTA models in networks
in mono-centric cities. Our numerical experiments indicate
that this algorithm can generate numerical solutions close to
analytical solutions while the solution scheme based on the
existing path marginal cost evaluation method cannot.

I. I NTRODUCTION
The system optimal dynamic trafc assignment (SO-DTA)
problem determines the time-dependent trafc ow pattern
that minimizes the total system costs. The problem is of great
importance to evaluating the efciency of real-time trafc
management strategies, such as dynamic congestion pricing,
incident management and emergency evacuation plans.
The SO-DTA problem is traditionally formulated and
solved as a mathematical program which minimizes the
sum of travel costs over a feasible set dened mainly by
link-based trafc propagation and demand conservation constraints. (e.g., Merchant & Nemhauser 1978 [1], Carey 1987
[2], Wie 1998 [3], Ziliaskopoulos [4], etc.) . However, to
represent realistic trafc propagation rules, non-convexity in
the feasible set is often inevitable, because explicitly ensuring
the rst-in-rst-out (FIFO) rule for multiple commodities at
the link level and analytically describing trafc dynamics
both require non-linear equality constraints, making the
model difcult to solve.
Path-based SO-DTA models, which encapsulate trafc
propagation into a path cost mapping and hence may bypass
the non-convexity issue associated with link-based SO-DTA
models. However, research along this line is rather limited.
One major reason is that solving path-based SO-DTA models
usually requires gradients of the total system cost, i.e., the
change in the total system cost with respect to the unit change
in the path ow, which we call path marginal cost (PMC)
hereafter. Since the path cost mapping usually does not have
a closed form, the PMC evaluation is not straightforward.
This paper is motivated to make a thorough study on
path-based SO-DTA models, including model formulations
and solution procedures. In particular, we emphasize the
most critical part in the solution procedure, i.e., the PMC
evaluation. We try to clarify existing misconceptions about
the PMC evaluation, identify the associated difculties, and

propose an improved PMC evaluation scheme for networks


with a special type of topology.
The remainder of this paper is organized as follows:
Section II introduces the formulation of the path-based SODTA model. The optimal conditions that resemble Wardrops
second principle [5] are provided and the importance of
the PMC evaluation in solving path-based SO-DTA models is emphasized. The PMC evaluation is then discussed
thoroughly in Section III. Section IV presents the solution
procedure for the path-based SO-DTA models in networks
in mono-centric cities. Computational results and discussions
are reported in Section V, and Section VI presents conclusions and future research directions.
II. T HE PATH - BASED SO-DTA M ODEL
We consider a general transportation network with multiple origin-destination (OD) ows. The whole study horizon
Td is discretized into N intervals of length . We assume that
Td is long enough for all the trafc ows to clear the network.
The goal of the model is to nd the optimal departure time
choice and route choice path ow pattern such that the total
system travel cost, including travel time cost and schedule
delay cost, is minimized.
The following notations are used throughout this paper:
a) Set notations
RS
set of OD pairs
set of routes connecting OD pair rs
P rs
the whole departure time horizon, Td =
Td
{1, 2, ..., N }

corresponding author, Tel: 530-754-9203, Email: hmzhang@ucdavis.edu

1-4244-0094-5/06/$20.00 2006 IEEE

1298

b) Indices
rs
OD pair, rs RS
p
route between OD pair rs, p P rs
t
index for departure time, t Td
c) Variables to be determined
rs
ow entering route p P rs at time t
fpt
rs
f
path ow vector,
 f = {fpt } with dimension n = N rsRS |P rs |
d) Functions of path ow f
crs
pt (f ) actual path travel time for ow entering
path p P rs at time t, which is a unique
mapping with respect to f
(f
)
generalized cost incurred by travelers enrs
pt
tering path p P rs at time t, which is a
unique mapping with respect to f
qtrs
demand between OD pair rs at time t
e) Parameters given

Qrs
cs (t)
ts
s

s
s

total demand for OD pair rs during the


study horizon
schedule delay cost for travelers arriving
at destination at time t
desired arrival time for travelers going to
destination s, ts Td
arrival time exibility for travelers going
to destination s, s 0
cost of one unit of travel time for travelers,
>0
unit cost of schedule delay caused by the
early arrival of travelers at destination s,
s > 0
unit cost of schedule delay caused by the
late arrival of travelers at destination s,
s > 0.

To facilitate further discussion, we provide the denition


of PMC below explicitly.
rs
Denition 1 (Path marginal cost P M Cpt
(f )): Given a
rs
specic path ow pattern f = {fpt , p, t, rs}, the path
marginal cost for path p at time t represents the increase in
the total system cost when the path inow on p is increased
by one unit. Namely,

T C(f )
rs
P M Cpt
(f ) =
=
rs
fpt

Note that destination-based parameters (s , s , s ) are


used to reect the difference of value-of-time among travelers associated with different destinations. According to
empirical data, > > , and we have the following
relationship:
rs
s
rs
rs
pt (f ) = cpt (f ) + c [t + cpt (f )]

and can be represented by:


if t < ts s
if ts s t ts + s
if t > ts + s
(2)
Using the dened path variables and functions, the SODTA problem optimizing both departure time and route
choices can be formulated as the following minimization
problem :
  
rs
fpt
rs
(3)
min T C(f ) =
pt (f )
f

subject to

rs
fpt
= qtrs , rs RS, t Td

tTd
rs

fpt

qtrs = Qrs (given), rs RS

(5)

0, rs RS, k Krs , t Td

(6)

According to Karush-Kuhn-Tucker (KKT) conditions, the


rst-order necessary conditions of optimality are constraints
,u)
rs L(f ,u)
= 0, r, s, p, t and L(f
0.
(4) - (6) plus fpt
rs
rs
fpt
fpt
Namely,

rs
fpt

T C(f )
rs
rs
fpt


= 0, rs RS, p P rs , t Td
(7)

T C(f )
rs 0, rs RS, p P rs , t Td
rs
fpt
 
rs
fpt
Qrs = 0, rs RS
tTd pP rs
rs
0, rs
fpt

RS, k Krs , t Td

rs rs
fp
p (f )

(11)

In the static case, the PMC is the sum of the link marginal
cost(LMC). In the dynamic case, the PMC evaluation is
much more complicated since path ows are not assigned
to links on the path simultaneously. However, for trafc
dynamics models which do not consider link interactions,
such as the point queue model, the exit ow function,
the link performance function and so on, a decomposition
scheme from path marginal cost to link marginal cost is
still possible. To illustrate this, we further introduce the
following additional notations:
Link variables and functions
ow entering link a at time t
uat
ua
link inow vector, ua = {uat , t Td }
link travel time for ow entering link a at time t
cat
ust
ow arriving at destination s at time t

(4)

pP rs

Td rsRS pRS
rs
fpt

III. PATH M ARGINAL C OST E VALUATION

tTd rsRS pP rs

It is obvious that (7) and (8) convey the Wardrop second


principle in terms of time-dependent path marginal cost, i.e.,
at dynamic system optimum, the time-dependent marginal
cost on all the paths actually used are equal and less than the
marginal cost on any unused path. Consequently, if we can
rs
efciently evaluate path marginal cost P M Cpt
, r, s, p, t,
algorithms for solving equilibrium problems may be applied
to solve this SO-DTA problem, at least approximately1 .

(1)

where cs (t) is piecewise linear


s s
[(t s ) t]
s
0
c (t) =
s
[t (ts + s )]

For dynamic trafc models not considering link interactions, cat is uniquely determined by the inow pattern ua
on link a. Hence, we can treat cat as a function of ua ,
i.e., cat = cat (ua ). Then the total travel cost T C(f ) can
be written as follows:


uat cat (ua ) +
ust cs (t) (12)
T C(f ) =
tTd aA

tTd sS

Substituting (12) into (11) and using the chain rule, the
following relationship can be easily derived:
 
rs
(f ) =
LM Cak (ua )Indak
P M Cpt
ptrs (f )
aA kTd

(8)



cs (k)Indsk
ptrs (f )

(13)

sS kTd

(9)
(10)

1 Note that the solution based on this method may only be approximate
since the KKT conditions may not be totally sufcient due to the non-closed
form of rs
pt (f ) in the objective function.

1299

where LM Cak (ua ) and Indak


ptrs (f ) are link marginal
costs and path ow perturbation propagation index, whose
denitions are provided below.
Denition 2 (Link marginal cost): Given a specic link
inow pattern ua = {uat , t Td } for link a, the link
marginal cost for link a at time t represents the change in
the total link cost when the link inow at time t is increased
by one unit. Namely

LM Cat (ua ) :=


Td

ua ca (ua )
, a A, t Td

uat

(14)

Denition 3 (Path ow perturbation propagation index):


Given a specic path ow pattern f and the corresponding
link inow pattern u. the path ow perturbation propagation
index Indak
ptrs (f ) represents the change in the inow of link
a at time k when the path ow at time t is increased by
one unit. Namely,
Indak
ptrs (f )

uak
rs
fpt

(15)

According to (13), PMCs for trafc models not considering link interactions can still be regarded as additive as long
as path ow perturbation propagations are correctly captured.
Ghali & Smith (1995) [6] provides a sound analytical
formulation for LMCs based on the link cumulative curves
for the point queue model. It is shown that the link marginal
cost is equal to the time difference between the time when
the vehicle enters the link and the earliest time after that
when the queue on the link vanishes. We utilize this LMC
evaluation method in our discussion.
The problem of evaluating the path ow perturbation
propagation seems to be neglected in most existing pathbased SO-DTA studies. Most researchers (e.g., Ghali &
Smith 1995 [6], Peeta 1994 [7], etc. ) simply assume that
the path ow perturbation travels along the path at the same
speed as that of the additional ow unit. In other words, if
we denote za (t) as the entering time at link a for a vehicle
departing from the origin at time t and following path p,
then

1 if a p and k = za (t)
(16)
Indak
=
ptrs
0 otherwise
Based on this assumption on path ow perturbation propagations, PMCs in the dynamic case are additive according
to link traversal times (we assume that a path p consists of
a series of links a1 , a2 , . . . , am ). Namely,
rs
(f ) =
P M Cpt

m


LM Cai ,zai (t) (uai ) + cs (zs (t))

(17)

i=1

For narrative convenience, this PMC evaluation method is


referred to as the link traversal time (LTT) method hereafter.
Unfortunately, as we shall see in the following discussion,
this assumption on path ow perturbation propagation is
actually NOT true due to link bottleneck restrictions. We

[0, T]
q

c1

t 1f

t 2f
2

link 1

c2
3

link 2

q > c1 >c2
Fig. 1.

An illustration network with two sequential links

demonstrate this claim by showing in a simple example


network involving two sequential links how the path ow
perturbation propagates along the path.
The illustration network in Fig. 1 contains two links 1
and 2 and each link has a bottleneck at its downstream end.
The capacities of the bottlenecks at link 1 and link 2 are c1
and c2 , respectively, and free ow travel times of link 1 and
link 2 are t1f and t2f . During time [0, T ], vehicles enter the
network from link 1 at a constant ow rate q. We assume
that q > c1 > c2 . Obviously, queues will develop at both of
the bottlenecks. The cumulative curves for these two links
are illustrated in Fig. 2, where t1e and t2e represent the times
that the queues on link 1 and link 2 vanish, and N is the
total number of vehicles released in [0, T ].
According to the cumulative curves in Fig. 2, the vehicle
entering link 1 at time t1 [0, Td ] will enter link 2 at time
t2 . Suppose we want to evaluate P M Ct1 (f ). To simplied
the discussion, no schedule delay cost is considered.
Based on the denition, P M Ct1 (f ) can be evaluated by
constructing the new cumulative curves for link 1 and 2 with
an additional ow unit entering link 1 at time t1 (Fig. 2).
Fig. 2 shows that the additional costs incurred in link 1 and
link 2 by the additional unit path ow are t1e t1 and t2e t2 ,
respectively. Hence,
P M Ct1 (f ) = LM C1,t1 (f ) + LM C2,t1e (f )
= (t1e t1 ) + (t2e t1e )
= t2e t1

(18)

However, the LTT method predicts the additional costs


in link 1 and link as link marginal cost LM C1,t1 (u1 ) and
LM C2,t2 (u2 ) ( Fig. 3). Namely,
P M Ct1 (f ) =

LM C1,t1 (u1 ) + LM C2,t2 (u2 )

t1e t1 + t2e t2

>

P M Ct1 (f )

(19)

Consequently, P M Ct1 (f ) is larger than LM C1,t1 (u1 ) +


LM C2,t2 (u2 ) by (t1e t2 ). In other words, the LTT method
tends to overestimate the PMC for two sequential links in this
simple network. The reason of the overestimation is that the
path ow perturbation actually travels more slowly than the
additional ow unit because of the link bottleneck capacity
restriction. More specically, the perturbation caused by an
additional unit ow entering link 1 at time t1 will not
propagate onto link 2 so long there is a queue present on
link 1. Namely,

1 if k = t1e
2k
(20)
Indptrs =
0 otherwise

1300

Additional cost incurred by


the additional unit vehicle

when the queue on link ai vanishes and can be read directly


from the cumulative curves.
Consequently, the PMC can still be regarded as additive
except that we replace the original time zai (t) which is the
time that the additional ow unit reaches link ai by the time
dai (t) which is the actual time that the path ow perturbation
reaches link ai . For narrative convenience, we will refer
to this new PMC evaluation method as the perturbation
propagation time (PPT) method.

original cum. curves


new cum. curves

Additional cost incurred by


the additional unit vehicle

1 unit vehicle

N
c1

c1

c2

1 unit vehicle

t1 t 1 T

t2

Fig. 2.
#

t 1e

t 1f

LMCa1 (t1 )

L MCa2 (t2 )

IV. S OLUTION P ROCEDURE

N
q

c1

c1

1 unit vehicle

Fig. 3.

t 2e

Path marginal costs for the illustration network

t2 t 2f + t1f t 1e

A. The heuristic method of successive average (MSA) algorithm

c2

1 unit vehicle

t1 t 1f T

t2

t 1e

t 1f

t2 t 2f + t1f t 1e

t 2e

Link marginal costs for the illustration network

In fact, this propagation rule is also applied to two sequential links in a merge. For more general networks involving
diverges, evaluating path ow perturbation propagation is
much complicated since the path ow perturbation will also
affects the inows of links not on the path as well.
In view of the deciency in the existing PMC evaluation
method, i.e., the problematic assumption on the path ow
perturbation propagation, we present a new path marginal
cost evaluation method for networks in mono-centric cities,
i.e., networks without diverges2 .
To evaluate PMCs, we need to keep track of the path ow
perturbation propagation among links. For networks without
a diverge, this is quite easy to achieve based on the dynamic
network loading results. If we denote dai (t) as the actual
time that the perturbation of the path ow departing at time
t reaches link ai , we have the following relationship:

1 if k = dai (t)
ai k
i = 1, . . . , m
(21)
Indptrs =
0 otherwise
Substituting (21) into (13), we get:
rs
P M Cpt
=

m


LM Cai ,dai (t) (uai ) + cs [ds (t)]

(22)

i=1

Based on the DNL (Dynamic Network Loading) results,


dai (t) can be derived by the following recursion relationships:
da1 (t)
dai (t)
ds (t)

= t
= wai1 [dai1 (t)], i = 2, . . . , m
= wam [dam (t)]

(23)
(24)
(25)

where wai (t), referred to as the path ow perturbation


propagation lag hereafter, is the earliest time after t + cai (t)
2A

thorough discussion for general networks will be reported elsewhere.

Once PMCs are available, we can transform the path-based


SO-DTA model into an equilibrium problem and solve it
using variational inequality methods. It is well know that
equilibrium conditions like the rst order optimality conditions of the path-based SO-DTA model can be transformed
into the following variational inequality (VI) problem:
  
rs
rs
rs
P M Cpt
(f )[fpt
fpt
] 0, f
tTd rsRS pP rs

(26)
where is a polyhedron dened by (9) and (10).
Ever since Friesz et al. [8] and Smith [9] proposed the VI
formulation of the predictive user equilibrium dynamic trafc
assignment problem, the solution algorithms to dynamic
equilibrium problems in transportation have been studied
extensively. Since the comparison of the performance of
different algorithms is beyond the scope of this paper, in
this study, we simply adopted the heuristic MSA algorithm
to solve this path marginal cost equilibrium problem.
We describe the complete steps of the MSA algorithm
for solving the path-based SO-DTA problem in networks in
mono-centric cities as follows:
MSA algorithm for solving the path-based SO-DTA model:
Step 0. Select an initial path ow pattern f0 and set k = 0.
Step 1. Load f k into the network.
Step 2. For all rs RS, search for the time-dependent
path [p , t ] with the least marginal cost, i.e., [p , t ] =
rs
(f ).
argminpP rs ,tTd P M Cpt
Step 3. Obtain the auxiliary path ow pattern g(f k ) by
assigning all the demands Qrs , rs RS onto [p , t ];
Step 4. Set = 1/k and update the solution by setting
f k+1 = (1 )f k + g(f k );
Step 5. Check if ||f k+1 f k ||/||f k || < (a predetermined
parameter). If yes, stop; otherwise, set k = k + 1 and return
to step 1.
B. Algorithm for time-dependent least marginal cost path
searching
The only unresolved part of the above heuristic MSA
algorithm is to search for the time-dependent least marginal
cost path. Our time-dependent least marginal cost path
searching algorithm is designed based on the DOT algorithm
by Chabini (1998) [10] for time-dependent minimal cost path

1301

TABLE I
N ETWORK CHARACTERISTICS IN ALL THE SCENARIOS
tf : MIN , s: VEH / HR

(TDMCP) searching, which has been shown to have the


minimal computational complexity among all the existing
TDMCP algorithms.
If we denote Di (t), i N as the label for node i at time t,
i.e., the temporal minimal cost, pi (t) as the pointer denoting
the predecessor link on the temporal time-dependent shortest
path, and cij (t) as the time-dependent cost for link (ij) at
time t, the DOT algorithm for time-dependent minimal cost
path searching can be described as follows:

Scenario I

route 1
route 2

no bottleneck,
bottleneck I:

tf = 60
tf = 12,

s = 1500

Scenario II

route 1
route 2

no bottleneck,
bottleneck I:
bottleneck II:

tf = 60
tf = 6,
tf = 12,

s = 2000;
s = 1500

route 1
route 2

no bottleneck,
bottleneck I:
bottleneck II:
bottleneck III:

tf
tf
tf
tf

= 60
= 4.8,
= 8.4,
= 12,

s = 2000;
s = 1800;
s = 1500

Scenario III

Departure rate(veh/interval)

DOT algorithm for TDMCP searching:


Step 0: Initialization: set Di (t) = , i = s and Ds (t) =
0, t < N . Set ps (t) := 0, t.
Step 1: Set Di (N ) := the static shortest path tree rooted at
s with all costs dened by cij (N ). Furthermore, note that
Di (t) = Di (N ), t N .
Step 2: For t = N 1 down to 0:
for (i, j) A
if Di (t) > cij (t) + Dj (t + ij (t))
Di (t) := cij (t) + Dj [t + ij (t)];
pj [t + ij (t)] := [i, t];
endif
endfor
In our case, the path marginal cost is actually not additive
according to link traversal times but according to path ow
perturbation propagation times along the path. Hence, t +
ij (t) in the original algorithm should be replaced by wij (t)
to represent the correct path ow perturbation propagation
relationships in a compacted time-space expansion network.
After this revision, the DOT algorithm can be applied to
search for the time-dependent least marginal cost path.

14
12
10
8

scenario I
scenario II
scenario III
analytical solution

4
2

scenario II

scenario I

Analytical solution

0
0

20

40
60
80
Assignment interval (30s)

100

120

Departure rate (veh/interval)

(a) Route 1

30
Analytical solution

25
scenario III

20

scenario II

15
scenario I
scenario II
scenario III
analytical solution

10
5
0
0

20

scenario I

40
60
80
Assignment interval (30s)

100

120

(b) Route 2

V. N UMERICAL RESULTS

Fig. 4.

In this section, we give numerical results to demonstrate


how the proposed algorithm for path-based SO-DTA models
based on the PPT PMC evaluation method performs. For
comparison purpose, a similar solution procedure based on
the LTT PMC evaluation method is also implemented. All the
algorithms are coded in MS-VC++ and run on a WindowsXP PC (Intel Pentium M 1.60 GHz, 768 MB of RAM).

scenario III

Numerical solutions based on the PPT method

Note that tf is measured from the origin to the bottleneck


or destination. A quick calculation reveals that the analytical
solutions for all the three scenarios are the same as follows:

A. Numerical example I

For [0, 36min] :


For [36min, 60min] :

To demonstrate how the prediction of path ow perturbation propagations affects the accuracy of the nal system
optimum solution, an example network with two routes in
parallel is constructed. To simplify the discussion, we only
focus on the system optimal route choice, and the timedependent departure rates are assumed to be given. The
free ow travel times of route 1 and route 2 are 60min
and 12min respectively. Vehicles depart from the origin at
a constant departure rate q = 3000veh/hr for one hour.
Route 1 does not have any bottlenecks. Three scenarios
which differ from each other in the number of bottlenecks
on route 2 are designed. The capacity characteristics of three
scenarios are summarized in Table I. We expect that the more
bottlenecks on a route, the more errors might be incurred by
the inaccurate prediction of path ow propagations.

We now apply both the PPT and LTT methods and combine
them with the heuristic MSA algorithm to solve the SO-DTA
problem. The numerical solutions of route choice patterns
based on these two methods, in comparison to the analytical
solution, are depicts in Fig. 4 and Fig. 5.
In scenario I, the numerical solutions based on both the
PPT and LTT methods are identical and very close to the
analytical solution. This is not a surprise because when there
is only 1 bottleneck on route 2, the PMCs are actually
LMCs and no path ow perturbation propagation indices are
required to obtain PMCs. In scenario II and III, the PPT
method can still achieve very good accuracy compared to the
analytical solution, while the numerical solutions based on
the LTT method show distinct deviations from the analytical
solution.

1302

d1 (t) = 1500veh/hr, d2 (t) = 1500veh/hr


d1 (t) = 0, d2 (t) = 3000veh/hr

Departure rate (veh/interval)

in the LTT method, the decient prediction of path ow


perturbation propagation affects the accuracy of marginal
schedule delay at the destination.

14
12

scenario III

10
8
6

scenario II

Analytical solution

scenario I
scenario II
scenario III
analytical solution

4
2

VI. C ONCLUSIONS

scenario I

This paper studies the solution procedure for path-based


SO-DTA models. The most critical part in the solution
procedure, i.e., the evaluation of PMCs, is identied and
discussed thoroughly. A solution algorithm for path-based
SO-DTA models based on a new PMC evaluation method
is developed and tested on simple networks. Our limited
numerical examples indicate that the proposed heuristic
MSA algorithm based on the PPT PMC evaluation method
can generate numerical solutions very close to analytical
solutions, for both SO-DTA problems optimizing departure
time choices and route choices.
At present our proposed solution method can only be applied to networks without diverges and the embedded trafc
dynamics models are restricted to those not considering link
interactions. The relaxation of either aspects may bring in
additional challenges in predicting path ow perturbation
propagations and is worth further investigation.

0
0

20

40
60
80
Assignment interval (30s)

100

120

(a) Route 1

Departure rate (veh/interval)

30
25

Analytical solution
scenario I

20

scenario II

15
scenario I
scenario II
scenario III
analytical solution

10
5
0
0

20

scenario III

40
60
80
Assignment interval (30s)

100

120

(b) Route 2

Fig. 5.

Numerical solution based on the LTT method

Departure rate (veh/interval)

40
PPT
LTT
Analytical solution

35
30

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

25

This research is supported in part by a grant from the National Science Foundation under the number CMS#9984239.
The views are those of the authors alone.

20
15
10
5

R EFERENCES

0
0

20

40

60

80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240


Assignment interval (30s)

Fig. 6.

Numerical solutions based on both PPT and LTT methods

B. Numerical example II
The second numerical example is designed to test whether
the heuristic MSA method based on the PPT PMC evaluation
method can generate an accurate system optimal departure
time choice pattern. The testing network contains only 1 link
and we aim at deriving the system optimal departure time
choice pattern. The link free ow travel time is tf = 10min,
and there is a bottleneck with capacity s = 1800veh/hr at the
downstream end of the link. The total demand is 1500veh.
The desired arrival time is t = 7 : 00am. The schedule delay
parameters are = 0, = 1, = 0.8, = 1.2. It is easy to
derive the analytical SO solution for this problem as follows:
Earliest departure time ts
Latest departure time te
Departure rate a(t) during [ts , te ]

= 6 : 20am
= 7 : 10am
= s = 1800veh/hr

[1] Merchant, D.K. and Nemhauser, G.L., A model and an algorithm


for the dynamic trafc assignment problems, Trans. Sci., vol. 12(3),
1978, pp 183-199.
[2] Carey, M., Optimal time-varying ows on congested networks, Oper.
Res., vol. 35(1), 1987, pp 58-69.
[3] Wie, B.-W., A convex control model of dynamic system-optimal
trafc assignment, Contr. Engr. Prac., vol. 6, 1998, pp 745-753.
[4] Ziliaskopoulos, A.K., A linear programming model for the single
destination system optimum dynamic trafc assignment problem,
Trans. Sci., vol. 34(1), 2000, pp 37-49.
[5] Wardrop, J.G., Some theoretical aspects of road trafc research, In
Proceedings of the Institute of Civil Engr., II, vol. 1, 1952, pp 325-378.
[6] Ghali, M. O. and Smith, M. J., A model for the dynamic system
optimum trafc assignment problem, Trans. Res., B, vol. 29(3), 1995,
pp 155-170.
[7] Peeta, S., System optimal dynamic trafc assignment in congested
networks with advanced information systems, Ph.D. thesis, The
university of Texas at Austin, 1994.
[8] Friesz, T.L. and Bernstein, D. and Smith, T.E. and Tobin, R.L. and
Wie, B.W., A variational inequality formulation of the dynamic
network user equilibrium problem, Oper. Res., vol. 41(1), 1993, pp
179-191.
[9] Smith, M.J., A new dynamic trafc model and the existence and calculation of dynamic user eqiubria on congested capacity-constrained
road networks, Trans. Res., B, vol. 26, 1993, pp 49-63.
[10] Chabini, I., Discrete dynamic shortest path problems in transportation
applications, Trans. Res. Rec., vol. 1645, 1998, pp 170-175.

We show the numerical optimal departure time choice


patterns based on both methods in Fig. 6 (t = 0 corresponds to
the time 6:00 am), in comparison with the analytical solution.
As we can see from the results, the heuristic MSA
algorithm based on the PPT method still can converge to
the analytical solution while the same algorithm based on
the LTT method cannot. This is understandable because

1303