A Key Station Identification Method for Urban Rail Transit: A Case Study of Beijing Subway

Abstract

INTRODUCTIONWith the rapid development of urban rail transit network operation technique, the increase of passenger volume leads to congestion in stations [1], causing even safety risk in the network [2]. Besides, the topology of urban rail transit network can also aggravate or relief the congestion situation of subway networks. Therefore, an effective method identified the key station is an imperative to manage the overcrowded urban rail transit.For the factors of the station performance, many of the current approaches focus on the relationship between passenger flow and facility capacity. Xu et al.[3] combined queuing theory with facility utilization evaluation to conduct the station capacity evaluation, according to the gathering and scattering process of a station. Kepaptsoglou and Karlaftis [4] proposed a model to evaluate passenger evolution on subway station platforms, which usually gathered most passengers. Wang et al.[5] also used the passenger evacuation capacity to evaluate the station based on the facility utilization. If the service level of the facility is too low, there are big problems in the station.Besides, passengers' subjective feelings and other factors are also used for evaluation. Matulin et al.[6] proposed a two-level evaluation method to analyze public transport performances from micro and macro levels, using performance indicators and quality of service indicators. Kesten and Öğüt [7] developed a measurement framework of passenger-oriented performance to evaluate rail transportation, using satisfaction and importance ratings obtained from passenger surveys.Meanwhile, there are many approaches employed in the station evaluation. Some typical methods such as Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) have played their great role in the station assessment. Sancha et al. [8] used the method to estimate the technical, social and environmental efficiency of transit transfer stations. Pjevčević et al. [9] used DEA method to measure and analyze the efficiencies of ports on the Danube River, which can be borrowed for station evaluation. In addition, simulation is also another method, where relevant simulation or operation data are provided. Zhang et al. [10] proposed a cellular automata-based model to simulate passengers' alighting and boarding behaviours in metro stations, aiming to analyze and evaluate the operation performance of stations. However, most works above do not consider the influence of other stations in the subway system, which results in local rather than global conclusions.Fortunately, in recent years, a complex network theory has been introduced to the station evaluation from a global viewpoint. Indexes such as degree centrality, betweenness centrality, and closeness centrality have an outstanding ability to identify key nodes from the network [11][12][13][14]. Sheikhahmadi et al. [12] proposed an improved high degree centrality index to identify the Traffic Management Original Scientific Paper

Evaluation Method for Node Importance of Urban Rail Network Considering Traffic Characteristics

“…Lai et al [36] established urban rail topology models of multiple cities, the toke network efficiency, and the largest connected subgraph as indicators to measure the network performance, and they found that the KSD identification method was superior to the node degree, neighbor node degree, DKS, and DKSN identification methods. Some scholars realized that there are differences in node importance in different application environments, and they tried to improve and even build new evaluation methods to more accurately obtain the key nodes that have the greatest impact on the urban rail network performance [37][38][39]. Liu et al [37] defined the topology of urban rail networks using the idea of Space P and Space L and a new parameter to evaluate the node importance and found that urban rail networks are more vulnerable to intentional attacks than random network attacks based on this node importance method.…”

Assessment and solutions for vulnerability of urban rail transit network based on complex network theory: A case study of Chongqing

“…Moreover, some scholars have considered PFV (passenger flow volume) while exploring network features, as it reflected the transportation capacity of RTN. The importance ranking of RTN nodes has been determined based on the variance contribution of each indicator using techniques like Technique for Order of Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS) and factor analysis [ 33 , 34 ]. It has been pointed out that attacks based on the highest load node could result in more damages compared with the attacks based on the largest degree node [ 35 ].…”

Weighted Complex Network Analysis of the Difference Between Nodal Centralities of the Beijing Subway System

“…With the rapid development of information technology, large amounts of data over time and space are available to model urban dynamics. In particular, monitoring, recognising and analysing human mobility patterns is becoming a hot issue in transport and urban planning [39][40]. Urban traffic arises from an interplay between the dynamics of the individual movements and its underlying structure.…”