Ride-pooling service assessment with heterogeneous travellers in non-deterministic setting

IF 3.5 2区 工程技术 Q1 ENGINEERING, CIVIL
Michal Bujak, Rafal Kucharski
{"title":"Ride-pooling service assessment with heterogeneous travellers in non-deterministic setting","authors":"Michal Bujak, Rafal Kucharski","doi":"10.1007/s11116-024-10527-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Ride-pooling remains a promising emerging mode with a potential to contribute towards urban sustainability and emission reductions. Recent studies revealed complexity and diversity among travellers’ ride-pooling attitudes. So far, ride-poling analyses assumed homogeneity of ride-pooling travellers. This, as we demonstrate, leads to a false assessment of ride-pooling system performance. We experiment with an actual NYC demand from 2016 and classify travellers into four groups of various ride-pooling behaviours (value of time and penalty for sharing), as reported in the recent SP study from Netherlands. We replicate their behavioural characteristics, according to the population distribution, to obtain meaningful performance estimations. Results vary significantly from the homogeneous benchmark: mileage savings were lower, while the utility gains for travellers were greater. Observing performance of heterogeneous travellers, we find that those with a low value of time are most beneficial travellers in the pooling system, while those with an average penalty for sharing benefit the most. Notably, despite the highly variable travellers’ behaviour, the confidence intervals for the key performance indicators are reasonably narrow and system-wide performance remains predictable. Our results show that the incorrect assumption of homogeneous traits leads to a high dissatisfaction of 18.5% and a cancellation rate of 36%. Such findings shed a new light on the expected performance of large scale ride-pooling systems.</p>","PeriodicalId":49419,"journal":{"name":"Transportation","volume":"44 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Transportation","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11116-024-10527-z","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, CIVIL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Ride-pooling remains a promising emerging mode with a potential to contribute towards urban sustainability and emission reductions. Recent studies revealed complexity and diversity among travellers’ ride-pooling attitudes. So far, ride-poling analyses assumed homogeneity of ride-pooling travellers. This, as we demonstrate, leads to a false assessment of ride-pooling system performance. We experiment with an actual NYC demand from 2016 and classify travellers into four groups of various ride-pooling behaviours (value of time and penalty for sharing), as reported in the recent SP study from Netherlands. We replicate their behavioural characteristics, according to the population distribution, to obtain meaningful performance estimations. Results vary significantly from the homogeneous benchmark: mileage savings were lower, while the utility gains for travellers were greater. Observing performance of heterogeneous travellers, we find that those with a low value of time are most beneficial travellers in the pooling system, while those with an average penalty for sharing benefit the most. Notably, despite the highly variable travellers’ behaviour, the confidence intervals for the key performance indicators are reasonably narrow and system-wide performance remains predictable. Our results show that the incorrect assumption of homogeneous traits leads to a high dissatisfaction of 18.5% and a cancellation rate of 36%. Such findings shed a new light on the expected performance of large scale ride-pooling systems.

Abstract Image

在非确定性环境中对异质乘客进行拼车服务评估
合乘仍是一种前景广阔的新兴模式,具有促进城市可持续发展和减排的潜力。最近的研究揭示了旅客拼车态度的复杂性和多样性。迄今为止,拼车分析都假定拼车旅行者具有同质性。正如我们所证明的,这会导致对拼车系统性能的错误评估。我们利用 2016 年纽约市的实际需求进行了实验,并根据不同的拼车行为(时间价值和拼车惩罚)将乘客分为四组,如荷兰最近的 SP 研究报告所述。我们根据人口分布复制了他们的行为特征,以获得有意义的性能估算。结果与同质基准差异很大:节省的里程数较少,而旅行者获得的效用收益较大。通过观察异质旅行者的表现,我们发现时间价值较低的旅行者是集合系统中最受益的旅行者,而分享惩罚一般的旅行者受益最大。值得注意的是,尽管旅客的行为变化很大,但关键绩效指标的置信区间却相当窄,整个系统的绩效仍可预测。我们的研究结果表明,错误的同质假设导致了 18.5% 的高不满意度和 36% 的取消率。这些发现为大规模拼车系统的预期性能提供了新的启示。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Transportation
Transportation 工程技术-工程:土木
CiteScore
10.70
自引率
4.70%
发文量
94
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: In our first issue, published in 1972, we explained that this Journal is intended to promote the free and vigorous exchange of ideas and experience among the worldwide community actively concerned with transportation policy, planning and practice. That continues to be our mission, with a clear focus on topics concerned with research and practice in transportation policy and planning, around the world. These four words, policy and planning, research and practice are our key words. While we have a particular focus on transportation policy analysis and travel behaviour in the context of ground transportation, we willingly consider all good quality papers that are highly relevant to transportation policy, planning and practice with a clear focus on innovation, on extending the international pool of knowledge and understanding. Our interest is not only with transportation policies - and systems and services – but also with their social, economic and environmental impacts, However, papers about the application of established procedures to, or the development of plans or policies for, specific locations are unlikely to prove acceptable unless they report experience which will be of real benefit those working elsewhere. Papers concerned with the engineering, safety and operational management of transportation systems are outside our scope.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信