sustainability

Article
Dispatching High-Speed Rail Trains via Utilizing the
Reverse Direction Track: Adaptive Rescheduling
Strategies and Application
Sairong Peng 1 , Xin Yang 1, *, Hongwei Wang 2 , Hairong Dong 1 , Bin Ning 1 , Haichuan Tang 3 ,
Zhipeng Ying 4 and Ruijun Tang 5
1 State Key Laboratory of Rail Traffic Control and Safety, Beijing Jiaotong University, Beijing 100044, China;
[email protected] (S.P.); [email protected] (H.D.); [email protected] (B.N.)
2 National Research Center of Railway Safety Assessment, Beijing Jiaotong University, Beijing 100044, China;
[email protected]
3 CRRC Institute, CRRC Corporation Limited, Beijing 100067, China; [email protected]
4 China Academy of Railway Sciences, Beijing 100081, China; [email protected]
5 Hohhot Urban Rail Transit Construction Management Corporation Limited, Hohhot 010010, China;
[email protected]
* Correspondence: [email protected]




Received: 21 March 2019; Accepted: 15 April 2019; Published: 19 April 2019


Abstract: This paper studies the train rescheduling problem on high-speed railway corridor in the
situation where contingencies occur and lead to sudden deceleration of some trains. First, we develop
an adaptive rescheduling strategy (AR-S) which allows normal trains to use reverse direction track to
overtake front decelerating trains based on delay comparison under different path choices. Second,
the traditional rescheduling strategy (TR-S) which does not allow any trains to switch tracks is
mentioned as a sharp contrast to AR-S. Furthermore, a performance evaluation criterion is designed
to evaluate the effectiveness of the train rescheduling approaches. Finally, numerical experiments
carried out on Beijing-Tianjin intercity high-speed railway show that AR-S can reduce the total delay
of trains up to 24% in comparison with TR-S.

Keywords: high-speed railway; rescheduling strategy; reverse direction track; train delay

1. Introduction

1.1. Motivation
At present, the total length of the high-speed railways (HSR) in China is more than 20,000 km,
accounting for two-thirds of the total length of the world’s high-speed railways [1,2]. Furthermore,
it is estimated that, by 2025, the total length of China’s HSR will reach 38,000 km, and by 2030, all
provincial capitals (excluding Lhasa) will be connected by HSR [3]. Ensuring punctuality of trains
traveling on such large-scale rail networks as well as fully utilizing railway infrastructure is significant
to promote its sustainable development. Therefore, train scheduling/rescheduling problems become
critical topics in the operation of railway systems [4].
In this paper, we focus on the train rescheduling problem. When two consecutive trains travel on
corridor and the front train decelerates due to contingencies, it is necessary for the following train
to reduce speed for avoiding the rear-end collision. The contingencies happen occasionally and the
reasons are various. For example, if the communication of train and ground equipment is interrupted,
the focus train is forced to reduce speed below 160 km/h less than half of the maximal speed 350 km/h;
if someone smokes on a train, the train will slow down or emergency stop in sections. The data show

Sustainability 2019, 11, 2351; doi:10.3390/su11082351 www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability

Sustainability 2019, 11, 2351 2 of 20

that the daily average delay time of Guangzhou South Railway Station is 105 min during 24 March
2015 to 10 November 2016, and the number of delayed trains with over 10 min delay accounts for 22%
in all delayed trains [5]. That is the phenomenon normal trains are delayed by decelerating trains.
Especially on highly congested railway lines, more trains could be delayed and more total train delay
could be caused [6], resulting in the decrease of passenger satisfaction with railway services and the
increase of operation costs of railway industry [7]. To handle the problem mentioned above, this paper
proposes an adaptive rescheduling strategy to reschedule normal trains to overtake front decelerating
trains by utilizing reverse direction tracks.

1.2. Literature Review

In literature, train scheduling involves works at tactical level, which is to generate a nominal
timetable in advance through comprehensive consideration on passenger demands and rail resource
constraints and safety constraints [8–11]. To obtain the optimal/near-optimal solutions in the process
of train scheduling, mathematical models are formulated and then solved by heuristic methods. For
instance, Cacchiani et al. [12] proposed a Lagrangian heuristic based on an integer linear programming
formulation, aiming to introduce as many extra freight trains as possible in railway transportation
while keeping the disposition timetable conflict-free and as close as possible to the nominal one.
To obtain an efficient train timetable in congested lines, Cacchiani et al. [13] developed an iterative
heuristic algorithm that can produce solutions in short computing time. Similarly, to introduce extra
passenger trains in highly congested lines thus meet the increasing passenger demand, Jiang et al. [14]
extended the heuristic method proposed in Cacchiani et al. [12] and obtained an improved heuristic
method, where trains are able to stop at additional stations or even skip a few stations and the dwelling
time of some trains at some stations can be prolonged. Interestingly, energy conservation is also taken
into account in some literatures concerning train scheduling. For instance, Yang et al. [15] formulated
an integer programming model to improve the utilization of regenerative energy (i.e., electrical energy
converted from kinetic energy during the train braking process). A genetic algorithm with binary
encoding was further applied to obtain the energy-efficient schedule. Yang et al. [16] enhanced the
utilization rate of regenerative energy by altering the dwell times of current timetable slightly in urban
rail systems. Moreover, the period time and number of trains remain unchanged for practical concern.
To reduce both travel time and energy consumption in urban rail systems, Yang et al. [17] formulated
an integer programming model with two objectives to jointly optimize train schedule and speed profile.
Moreover, an adaptive genetic algorithm was designed to obtain the optimal solution. Yang et al. [18]
presented a survey on energy-efficient train operation for urban rail systems, concluding that jointly
optimizing train schedule and train speed profile would be a future trend for achieving a better energy
and time saving performance in railway transportation. It is worthwhile pointing out that for further
study about train scheduling, we can refer to literature [19–22]. For example, Cacchiani and Toth [19]
presented the main works concerning the train scheduling problem in its robust and nominal versions,
and Caimi et al. [22] surveyed the combinatorial optimization models and practical applications for
train scheduling problem.
Train rescheduling involves works at operational level and its main purpose is to keep the
timetable as close as possible to the nominal one in emergency situations. Cacchiani et al. [23] presented
an overview of recovery models and algorithms for real-time railway disruption and disturbance
management. Zhan et al. [24] focused on rescheduling trains on macroscopic railway networks in
a highly disrupted situation, then a mixed integer programming model was proposed to generate
disposition timetables. Samà et al. [25] modeled the real-time train routing selection problem as an
integer linear programming formulation which was solved by an ant colony optimization algorithm. In
order to handle the rescheduling problem on metro lines, Gao et al. [26] proposed an optimization model
which was heuristically decomposed into a set of mixed-integer linear programming sub-problems.
An iterative algorithm based on the decomposition was further proposed to solve the model. On
the basis of reinforcement learning (i.e., Q-learning), a train rescheduling method was introduced in
Sustainability 2019, 11, 2351 3 of 20

Šemrov et al. [27], where five components of the Q-learning principles (i.e., environment and its states,
learning agent and its actions, and the reward function) were further discussed. Aiming at defining a set
of actions which are essential to ensure operation security in rail systems, Bettinelli et al. [28] proposed
a parallel algorithm on the basis of an iterated greedy scheduling of trains on a time-space network.
To reschedule trains on urban railway lines after small faults, a real-time train rescheduling strategy
was developed by Gao et al. [29], where the integration of dynamic feedback of fault handling was
considered in the proposed strategy. Binder et al. [30] introduced an integer linear programming model
for rescheduling trains with multi-objectives on a disrupted railway network, where operational costs,
passenger inconvenience, and deviation from the nominal timetable are three different objectives to
minimize. Yang et al. [31] interested in rescheduling metro trains with energy-efficient approach, where
an integer programing model was formulated and an allocation algorithm was designed to obtain
the optimal schedule that can reduce net energy consumption under the premise of ensuring train
punctuality. For further information about train rescheduling problem, we can refer to literature [32–37].
In order to reschedule trains under contingencies thus enhance the efficiency of railway operation,
this paper proposes a rescheduling strategy that allows normal trains to adaptively select routes for
punctually. The positions for trains’ switching tracks are not limited to stations. The crossovers in
sections can also be utilized, which increases the flexibility of the proposed strategy. The utilization
of reverse direction track was also considered by literature [38–40], but these works did not consider
the train rescheduling process, and the track-switching positions are limited to stations. Different
from these works, this paper considers the utilization of reverse direction track under contingencies.
Moreover, trains can switch tracks not only in stations, but also in sections between stations using
nodes. In this paper, nodes are the crossovers in sections between stations. We also described the
deficiency of the currently applied strategy in Chinese HSR operations, and concluded that adaptively
adjusting routes for trains can be a key step to efficiently use railway infrastructures and improve train
punctuality. The main contributions of this paper are as follows:
(1) Two train delay models for calculating train delays on double-track railway lines are rigorously
formulated. Specifically, different train path choices lead to different train delay models. In this
paper, the considered train path choices are: (a) the normal trains travel behind decelerating
trains on dedicated tracks; (b) the normal trains overtake front decelerating trains by utilizing
the reverse direction track if corresponding conditions are satisfied. Furthermore, we develop
an adaptive rescheduling strategy which is based on the analysis of train delays under different
path choices.
(2) A performance evaluation criterion is specifically designed to evaluate the effectiveness of train
rescheduling approaches.
(3) Numerical experiments are carried out on a real-life HSR line, i.e., Beijing-Tianjin intercity
high-speed railway, and result shows that the proposed rescheduling approach is superior to the
traditional rescheduling approach.
To clarify the contributions of our research, the detailed features of some closely related studies
are listed in Table 1.

Table 1. The detailed features of closely related studies.

Position for
Publication Type of Problem Safety Constraints Adaptively Selecting Routes
Switching Tracks
Mu and Dessouky [38] scheduling Stations Not consider Not consider
Xu et al. [39] scheduling Stations Consider Consider with local optimum
Xu et al. [40] scheduling Stations Consider Not consider
This paper rescheduling Stations & Nodes Consider Consider with local optimum

The rest of this paper is arranged as follows. Section 2 depicts the considered problem. In
Section 3, we first analyze in detail the safety constraints that must be met during train operation
Sustainability
Sustainability 2019,
2019, 11, x2351
FOR PEER REVIEW 4 4of
of 20
20

Then, analysis on train delays under different path choices is given, based on which an adaptive
process. Then,
rescheduling analysis
strategy on train delays
is developed. under
Section different paththe
4 demonstrates choices is given,and
effectiveness based on which
efficiency an
of the
proposed strategy by numerical experiments on the real-life Beijing-Tianjin HSR. Finally, we makeof
adaptive rescheduling strategy is developed. Section 4 demonstrates the effectiveness and efficiency a
the proposed strategy by
conclusion in Section 5. numerical experiments on the real-life Beijing-Tianjin HSR. Finally, we make
a conclusion in Section 5.
2. Problem Description
2. Problem Description
We consider the train rescheduling problem on double-track railway lines, where tracks are bi-
We consider the train rescheduling problem on double-track railway lines, where tracks are
directional so that they can be occupied by trains traveling in both directions. Figure 1 presents the
bi-directional so that they can be occupied by trains traveling in both directions. Figure 1 presents the
infrastructures on a Chinese high-speed railway corridor, where nodes are the crossovers in sections
infrastructures on a Chinese high-speed railway corridor, where nodes are the crossovers in sections
between stations. Different from the train stations, nodes are only for trains’ switching tracks and
between stations. Different from the train stations, nodes are only for trains’ switching tracks and
cannot be the dwelling position for any trains for safety concern. As shown in Figure 1, nodes are
cannot be the dwelling position for any trains for safety concern. As shown in Figure 1, nodes are
denoted by capitalized English letters. Further, node A and node B are two consecutive nodes and
denoted by capitalized English letters. Further, node A and node B are two consecutive nodes and the
the segment between them is called as segment AB, the name of other segments can be deduced by
segment between them is called as segment AB, the name of other segments can be deduced by analogy.
analogy. In Figure 1, the direction from right to left is defined as inbound direction, whereas the
In Figure 1, the direction from right to left is defined as inbound direction, whereas the direction from
direction from left to right is outbound direction. Moreover, the trains traveling toward
left to right is outbound direction. Moreover, the trains traveling toward inbound/outbound direction
inbound/outbound direction are termed as inbound/outbound trains and the tracks they use are
are termed as inbound/outbound trains and the tracks they use are termed as inbound/outbound tracks.
termed as inbound/outbound tracks.

Figure 1. Problem setting.

Figure 1. Problem setting.
For the traditional rescheduling strategy, inbound tracks are dedicated to inbound trains, whereas
outbound
For the tracks are dedicated
traditional rescheduling to outbound
strategy, trains.
inboundThe tracks
interested are problem
dedicatedis to that, when atrains,
inbound train
whereas outbound tracks are dedicated to outbound trains. The interested problem is that, when to
traveling on corridor decelerates suddenly due to contingencies, its following normal train needs a
decelerate
train for the
traveling onpurpose
corridorofdecelerates
avoiding rear-end suddenly collision,
due tothus suffering undesirable
contingencies, its following delay. To reduce
normal train
the time
needs to delay of normal
decelerate for thetrain,
purpose we consider
of avoidingto reroute
rear-end thecollision,
normal train thus to travel on
suffering reverse direction
undesirable delay.
track
To in the
reduce the next
timesegment
delay ofsonormal as to overtake
train, wefront
considerdecelerating
to reroutetrain. Figuretrain
the normal 2 illustrates
to travelthe on specific
reverse
process oftrack
direction a normalin thetrain
nextovertaking
segment so itsas
front decelerating
to overtake fronttrain by using reverse
decelerating direction
train. Figure track, where
2 illustrates the
specific train i isofa adecelerating
inboundprocess normal train train that encounters
overtaking its frontcontingencies
decelerating on segment
train by using BC.reverse
As timedirection
goes on,
inbound
track, train
where i + 1 passes
inbound i is a idecelerating
train train by travelingtrain on reverse directioncontingencies
that encounters track in segment BC, which
on segment BC.mayAs
reduce
time theon,
goes time inbound traini +i +1 1.
delay oftrain It is worth
passes train iremarking
by traveling thatonfrom the practical
reverse directionpoint
trackof inview,
segmentin order
BC,
to avoid
which mayexcessive
reduce the stresstimeondelay
switches, there
of train i +is1.aItprocess
is worthofremarking
deceleration thatand
fromacceleration
the practical before
pointand
of
after aintrain
view, order switching
to avoidtracks.
excessive However,
stress on the additional
switches, delay
there is a time
processcaused by switching
of deceleration andtracks is much
acceleration
less than
before the
and delay
after caused
a train by traintracks.
switching conflicts in real-word
However, train operations,
the additional delay time thuscaused
the acc/deceleration
by switching
processisismuch
tracks ignored, lessfor
thanit isthe
notdelay
the focuscausedof our study,conflicts
by train although initreal-word
is easy to take
trainthis part intothus
operations, account.
the
To describeprocess
acc/deceleration the interested
is ignored, problem
for it isconcisely,
not the focus we ofassume
our study,that although
decelerating traintoi take
it is easy startsthis
to
decelerate
part at time t, and let Di,BC be the time delay of decelerating train i on segment BC caused solely
into account.
by contingencies.
To describe the Tk,B interested
is the planned traveling
problem time forwe
concisely, train k fromthat
assume t to its arrivaltrain
timedecelerating timei atstarts
nodeto B,
decelerate at timeoft,Tand
and the meaning i,B and
let TDi+i ,1,B
BC
can
be be
the easily
time deduced
delay of by analogy.
decelerating train i on segment BC caused
solely by contingencies. T k , B is the planned traveling time for train k from time t to its arrival time
at node B, and the meaning of Ti , B and Ti +1, B can be easily deduced by analogy.
Sustainability 2019, 11, 2351 5 of 20
Sustainability 2019, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 5 of 20

Figure 2. Illustration of train i + 1 traveling on reverse direction track. Subgraph (a)–(c) show the
Figure 2. Illustration of train i + 1 traveling on reverse direction track. Subgraph (a), (b) and (c) show
situation before, during and after train i+1 traveling on reverse direction track, respectively.
the situation before, during and after train i+1 traveling on reverse direction track, respectively.
For example, in Figure 2a, the original planed speed for train i, train i + 1 and train k is 300 km/h
For example, in Figure 2a, the original planed speed for train i, train i + 1 and train k is 300 km/h
(i.e., 5 km/min), we assume that train i decelerates to 90 km/h (i.e., 1.5 km/min) at time t. The distances
(i.e., 5 km/min), we assume that train i decelerates to 90 km/h (i.e., 1.5 km/min) at time t. The distances
from train k, i and i + 1 to node B at time t are Lk , Li and Li+1 , respectively. We set the operation
from train k, i and i + 1 to node B at time t are Lk, Li and Li+1, respectively. We set the operation
information as Lk = 80 km, Li = 30 km, Li+1 = 60 km, then we have Ti,B = 30/5 = 6 min, Ti+1,B = 60/5 =
information as Lk = 80 km, Li = 30 km, Li+1 = 60 km, then we have Ti,B = 30/5 = 6 min, Ti+1,B = 60/5 = 12
12 min, Tk,B = 80/5 = 16 min, Di,BC = 30/1.5 − Ti,B = 14 min. As time goes on, if train i + 1 travels behind
min, Tk,B = 80/5 = 16 min, Di,BC = 30/1.5 − Ti,B = 14 min. As time goes on, if train i + 1 travels behind train
train i, without considering time headway, it is easy to deduce that the delay time of train i + 1 is 6 + 14
i, without considering time headway, it is easy to deduce that the delay time of train i + 1 is 6 + 14 −
− 12 = 8 min. But if train i + 1 is rescheduled to travel on reverse direction track in segment BC, we
12 = 8 min. But if train i + 1 is rescheduled to travel on reverse direction track in segment BC, we will
will find that there is no conflicts between any two trains, thus normal trains will not be delayed. The
find that there is no conflicts between any two trains, thus normal trains will not be delayed. The
corresponding ideal timetables are shown in Figure 3. However, by further analysis we realize that it is
corresponding ideal timetables are shown in Figure 3. However, by further analysis we realize that
not always the optimal solution to let normal trains travel on reverse direction track. For instance, if
it is not always the optimal solution to let normal trains travel on reverse direction track. For instance,
we set the operation information as Lk = 15 km, Li = 30 km and Li+1 = 60 km at time t, we have Ti,B =
if we set the operation information as Lk = 15 km, Li = 30 km and Li+1 = 60 km at time t, we have Ti,B =
30/5 = 6 min, Ti+1,B = 60/5 = 12 min, Tk,B = 15/5 = 3 min, Di,BC = 30/1.5 − Ti,B = 14 min. Considering
30/5 = 6 min, Ti+1,B = 60/5 = 12 min, Tk,B = 15/5 = 3 min, Di,BC = 30/1.5 − Ti,B = 14 min. Considering the
the following two rescheduling strategies: (a) train i + 1 travels behind train i on inbound tracks; (b)
following two rescheduling strategies: (a) train i + 1 travels behind train i on inbound tracks; (b) train
train i + 1 travels on reverse direction track in segment BC. We can deduce that the total train delay
i + 1 travels on reverse direction track in segment BC. We can deduce that the total train delay for (a)
for (a) is 6 + 14 − 12 = 8 min (for train i + 1) while that for (b) is 12 − 3 = 9 min (for train k), which
is 6 + 14 − 12 = 8 min (for train i + 1) while that for (b) is 12 − 3 = 9 min (for train k), which means
means rescheduling train i + 1 to travel on dedicated track is a better option. By further analysis, we
rescheduling train i + 1 to travel on dedicated track is a better option. By further analysis, we can
can conclude that whether rescheduling normal trains to travel on reverse direction track is an optimal
conclude that whether rescheduling normal trains to travel on reverse direction track is an optimal
solution depends on practical operation data. Therefore, how to determine the routes of normal trains
solution depends on practical operation data. Therefore, how to determine the routes of normal trains
based on practical operation information so as to minimize the total train delay is one of the central
based on practical operation information so as to minimize the total train delay is one of the central
problem this paper focuses on. One possible solution for that problem is that we determine the route
problem this paper focuses on. One possible solution for that problem is that we determine the route
of normal trains based on the comparison of the total train delay under different path choices, and the
of normal trains based on the comparison of the total train delay under different path choices, and
route that is finally decided to use will lead to the minimum total train delay.
the route that is finally decided to use will lead to the minimum total train delay.
Sustainability 2019, 11, 2351 6 of 20
Sustainability 2019, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 6 of 20

Figure 3.
Figure Idealtrain
3. Ideal traintimetables
timetablesfor
forthe
theproposed
proposed example.
example.

3. Formulation of Adaptive Rescheduling Strategy

3. Formulation of Adaptive Rescheduling Strategy
To deal with the train rescheduling problem presented in Section 2, in this section an adaptive
To deal with the train rescheduling problem presented in Section 2, in this section an adaptive
rescheduling strategy is proposed. For the feasibility of the proposed strategy, we first consider the
rescheduling strategy is proposed. For the feasibility of the proposed strategy, we first consider the
safety constraints that must be met in the real-life train operation process. It is worth mentioning
safety constraints that must be met in the real-life train operation process. It is worth mentioning that
that energy efficiency is also a key aspect of train operation [1–42]. But in Chinese high-speed train
energy efficiency is also a key aspect of train operation [1–42]. But in Chinese high-speed train
rescheduling process, safety and punctuality of trains directly relate to service quality, which is prior to
rescheduling process, safety and punctuality of trains directly relate to service quality, which is prior
energy efficiency in railway managers’ perspective. Consequently, we choose to minimize the total
to energy efficiency in railway managers’ perspective. Consequently, we choose to minimize the total
train delay in this paper.
train delay in this paper.
To understand and describe the problem conveniently, some decision variables and parameters
To understand and describe the problem conveniently, some decision variables and parameters
are listed in Table 2. Besides, some assumptions are made below first.
are listed in Table 2. Besides, some assumptions are made below first.
(A1) All the trains travel on double-track railway corridors where each track is bi-directional so that it
(A1) All the trains travel on double-track railway corridors where each track is bi-directional so that
can be occupied by trains traveling in both directions.
it can be occupied by trains traveling in both directions.
(A2) The communication capacity of the railway systems is guaranteed for a train switching tracks.
(A2) The communication capacity of the railway systems is guaranteed for a train switching tracks.
(A3) In
(A3) In comparison
comparison with
withthe
thelength
lengthof each railway
of each segment,
railway lengths
segment, of trains
lengths ofand nodes
trains arenodes
and extremely
are
short. Thus, for simplicity, trains and nodes are regarded as particle points.
extremely short. Thus, for simplicity, trains and nodes are regarded as particle points.
(A4) The
(A4) Thedecelerating
deceleratingtrains
trainsin
incontingencies
contingenciestravel
travelat
ataaconstant
constantspeed
speedbelow
belownormal
normalspeed.
speed.

Table 2. Some subscripts and parameters.

Table 2. Some subscripts and parameters.
Symbol Definition Symbol Definition
Symbol Definition Symbol Definition
I Set of inbound trains O Set of outbound trains
I Set of inbound trains O Set of outbound trains
Set of trains using reverse direction i, i +
R R Set of trains using reverse direction tracks i, i +Index
1, k ofIndex
trainof train
tracks 1, k
Departure interval between two
dk,B Departure time for train k from node B HDeparture interval between two
𝑑 , Departure time for train k from node B H consecutive trains
The time point when corresponding trains consecutive trains
Minimal interval between two consecutive
t T
The time beginpoint when corresponding
to decelerate because of contingencies trains traveling in same direction
Minimal interval between two consecutive
t trains begin
Plannedtotraveling
decelerate because
time for of time T
train k from Time delay of train i caused solely by
Tk,B Di,BC
trains traveling in same direction
t to
contingencies its arrival time at node B contingencies in segment BC
Minimal headway between
Planned traveling time for train k from train i + 1 and Minimal headway between
Time delay of train i caused solely +1
train iby
𝑇 , Hiaa+1,i train i reaching the same node. i ∈ 6I, i + 1 ∈ 𝐷 , Hida
+1,k leaving and train k reaching the same node.
time t to itsi arrival
I and + 1 ∈ R time at node B contingencies
K ∈ O, i in
+ 1segment
∈ I and i + BC
1∈R
Minimal headway between train i + 1 Minimal headway between train i + 1
𝐻 and train i
3.1. ,Safety Constraintsreaching the same node. i ∈ 𝐻 , leaving and train k reaching the same
6I, i + 1 ∈ I and i + 1 ∈ R node. K ∈ O, i + 1 ∈ I and i + 1 ∈ R
The premise for the implementation of any train rescheduling strategy is that the strategy fully
considers and satisfies the safety constraints in practical train operation, thus operation safety can be
ensured. In this paper, the considered safety constraints (C1–C3) are shown in Figure 4.
Sustainability 2019, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 7 of 20
Sustainability 2019, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 7 of 20

3.1.
3.1. Safety
Safety Constraints
Constraints
The
The premise
premise for for the
the implementation
implementation ofof any
any train
train rescheduling
rescheduling strategy
strategy is
is that
that the
the strategy
strategy7fully
fully
Sustainability 2019, 11, 2351 of 20
considers
considers and satisfies the safety constraints in practical train operation, thus operation safety can be
and satisfies the safety constraints in practical train operation, thus operation safety can be
ensured.
ensured. In In this
this paper,
paper, thethe considered
considered safety
safety constraints
constraints (C1–C3)
(C1–C3) are
are shown
shown inin Figure
Figure 4.4.
•
 C1. As
C1. shown ininFigure 4a, to avoid the risk of collision between inboundinboundtrain i + 1 and ioutbound
 C1. AsAs shown
shown in Figure
Figure 4a, 4a, to to avoid
avoid the the risk
risk of
of collision
collision between
between inbound train train i ++ 11 and
and
train
outboundk and in consideration of the responding time of the corresponding equipment (i.e., switches
outbound train k and in consideration of the responding time of the corresponding equipment
train k and in consideration of the responding time of the corresponding equipment
at node
(i.e., B), the time interval thebetween train i + 1 and train k arriving attrain
node B should at be no less
(i.e., switches
switches at at node
node B),B),da the
time
time interval
interval between between train
train ii ++ 11 and
and train kk arriving
arriving at node
node BB
than
should a fixed value, i.e., H .
i+1,k value, i.e., H i +da1, k .
da
should be be no
no less
less than
than aa fixed
fixed value, i.e., H i +1, k .
•
 C2.
C2. As
As shown
shown in
in Figure
Figure 4b,
4b, similar to
similar to (C1),
(C1), the the time
time interval
interval between
between train
train ii +++111and train ii arriving
and train arriving
 C2. As shown in Figure 4b, similar
at node B should be no less than Hi+aa1,i . to
aa (C1), the time interval between train i and train i arriving
at
at node
node BB should
should be be no
no less than H
less than Hii+aa+1,1,ii..
• C3. As shown in Figure 4c, the time headway between two consecutive trains traveling in same

 C3.
C3. AsAs shown
shown in Figure
in be
Figure 4c, the
the time
4c,than time headway between two consecutive trains traveling in same
direction should no less T. headway between two consecutive trains traveling in same
direction
direction should
should be be no
no less
less than
than T. T.

Figure 4. Safety
Safety constraints.
constraints.
Figure 4. Safety constraints.
3.2. Analysis
3.2. Analysis of Train
Train Delays under under Different Path Choices
3.2. Analysis of of Train Delays
Delays under Different Different Path
Path Choices
Choices
Based
Based on
on the analysis of safety constraints, we further
further analyze
analyze the the calculations for train
train delays
delays
under Based
differenton the
the
path
analysis
analysis
choices.
of
of safety
safety
As
constraints,
constraints,
show in Figure
we
we5(a1,b1),
further analyze
at time the
t,
calculations
calculations
inbound train
for
for
i train delays
encounters
under
under different
different path
path choices.
choices. As
As show
show in
in Figure
Figure 5(a1,b1),
5(a1,b1), atat time
time t,t, inbound
inbound train
train ii encounters
encounters aaa
contingency and
contingency and begins
begins to to slow
slow down down to to aa constant
constant speedspeed that
that below
below normal normal speed
speed on on thethe inbound
inbound
contingency
track in segment andBC, begins
and to
the slow
track down
where totrain
a constant
i speedisthat
decelerates below normal
highlighted with speed
dash line oninthe red inbound
color in
track
track in
in segment
segment BC,
BC, and
and the
the track
track where
where train
train ii decelerates
decelerates is
is highlighted
highlighted with
with dash
dash line
line inin red
red color
color
Figure
in 5. Meanwhile, the rest of trains (i.e., train k and train i + 1) travel normally on their dedicated
in Figure
Figure
tracks. At
5. Meanwhile,
5.time
Meanwhile,
t, neither
the
the rest
trainrest i +
of
of1trains
trains
nor
(i.e.,
(i.e.,ktrain
train train
has
kkand
and train
passed train
node
ii++1)
B1)ortravel
travel
node
normally
normally
C.
on
on their
Moreover, their
the
dedicated
dedicated
outbound
tracks.
tracks. At time t, neither train i + 1 nor train k has passed node B or node C. Moreover, the outbound
track
track inAt
in
time t,BC
segment
segment
neither
BC is
is nottrain
not occupied
occupied
i + 1 nor
by
by
train
any
any
k hastrains.
other
other
passed
trains. As
As
node
time
time
Bgoes
or node
goes on,
on, if C. Moreover,
ififinbound
inbound train
train
the
ii + outbound
++111 chooses
chooses
track
to in
travel segment
on BC
dedicated is not
track occupied
in segment by any
BC, other
case 1 trains.
showed Asin time
Figure goes 5a on,
will inbound
be obtained;train i
otherwise, chooses
we
to
to travel
travel on
on dedicated
dedicated track
track in
in segment
segment BC,
BC, case
case 11 showed
showed in
in Figure
Figure 5a
5a will
will be
be obtained;
obtained; otherwise,
otherwise,
willwill
we obtain case 2 showed in in
Figure 5b, where train i +i +11uses the reverse direction track to overtake
overtake
we willobtain
deceleratingobtain case
casei 2in
train 2showed
showed
segment
Figure
inBC.Figure5b,5b,where
wheretrain train i + 1uses
usesthe thereverse
reversedirection
directiontrack
trackto to overtake
decelerating
decelerating train train ii inin segment
segment BC. BC.

Figure 5. Comparison of two rescheduling strategies.

Figure 5. Comparison of two rescheduling strategies.
Figure 5. Comparison of two rescheduling strategies.
In case 1, in order to meet C3, train i + 1 may need to reduce its speed if train i is delayed greatly by
contingencies. The dash line in blue color in Figure 5a highlights the track where train i + 1 is delayed
by train i. In case 2, to satisfy C1 and C2, train k and train i may be delayed by train i + 1. Figures 6–8
respectively illustrate the possible delay of each train in case 1 and case 2, where corresponding
timetables are also presented. The dash lines in the timetables presented in Figures 6–8 denote the
 In case 1, in order to meet C3, train i + 1 may need to reduce its speed if train i is delayed greatly
by contingencies. The dash line in blue color in Figure 5a highlights the track where train i + 1 is
delayed by train i. In case 2, to satisfy C1 and C2, train k and train i may be delayed by train i + 1.
Figures 6–8 respectively illustrate the possible delay of each train in case 1 and case 2, where
corresponding
Sustainability 2019,timetables
11, 2351 are also presented. The dash lines in the timetables presented in Figures 8 of6–
20
8 denote the ideal trajectory of trains. In this paper, a train is called in the state of obstacle-travel
situation when it has to decelerate due to potential train conflicts; otherwise, a train in free-travel
ideal trajectory of trains. In this paper, a train is called in the state of obstacle-travel situation when
situation is such a train that travels without potential conflicts with any other trains. Here, let Z ko
it has to decelerate due to potential train conflicts; otherwise, a train in free-travel situation is such
f
and
a trainZ kthatbetravels
the time
withoutduration
potential − t for with
d k , Bconflicts trainany
k in obstacle-travel
other trains. Here,situation
let Zok andand
f free-travel
Zk be the time
duration d − t
situation, respectively.
k,B for trainThen, if train i + 1 conflicts with train k, train k’s delay Z k ,i +1 caused by
k in obstacle-travel situation and free-travel situation, respectively. Then,
trainif
f
itrain i + 1 conflicts
to Z ko −with k, train k’s delay Zalso i +train o
i + 1.to Zk − Zk . The same
+ 1 equals Z kf .train
The same calculation caused
k,i+1goes for by train
train i and 1 equals
calculation also goes for train i and train i + 1.
Actually, the train delay in this paper can be categorized into two types: one is the train delay
Actually, the train delay in this paper can be categorized into two types: one is the train delay
caused solely by contingencies (e.g., equipment failure, bad weather, etc.) and cannot be avoided or
caused solely by contingencies (e.g., equipment failure, bad weather, etc.) and cannot be avoided or
reduced by any rescheduling strategies, which is termed as fixed train delay (e.g., Di , BC ); the second
reduced by any rescheduling strategies, which is termed as fixed train delay (e.g., Di,BC ); the second
train
train delay
delayisiscause
causeby byoperational
operationalconflicts
conflictsbetween
betweentrains,
trains,which
whichisistermed
termedasasconflict
conflicttrain
traindelay.
delay.
Specifically, under same conditions, different rescheduling strategies may lead
Specifically, under same conditions, different rescheduling strategies may lead to different conflict train to different conflict
train
delay.delay. Further,
Further, we can weevaluate
can evaluate the effectiveness
the effectiveness of theofrescheduling
the rescheduling strategies
strategies according
according to thetototal
the
total conflict
conflict train train
delay.delay. Thetotal
The less less conflict
total conflict train delay
train delay is, theis, the more
more effective
effective rescheduling
rescheduling strategy strategy
can be.
can
Thebe. The following
following discussions
discussions presentpresent the detailed
the detailed analysisanalysis on conflict
on conflict train delay.
train delay.

3.2.1.Case
3.2.1. Case11Normal
NormalTrain
Train Traveling
Traveling on the Dedicated Track

The possible delay that train ii +

The possible + 1 may encounter
encounter when whentracing
tracingbehind traini ion
behindtrain ondedicated
dedicatedtrack
trackis
isillustrated
illustratedininFigure
Figure6.6.In fact,ifif TT
Infact, 1, B − (Ti,B
i+i +1,B +D
− (T i , B + i , BC ) ≥ T
Di,BC traini i++ 11 is able to travel on
) ≥ T, ,train on dedicated
dedicated
track without decelerating, meanwhile safety constraint C3 can always be satisfied because of the
track without decelerating, meanwhile safety constraint C3 can always be satisfied because of the
relatively large departure interval between train i + 1 and train i. Train i’s sudden decelerating does
relatively large departure interval between train i + 1 and train i. Train i’s sudden decelerating does
not affect the normal operation of any other trains, thus train i + 1’s switching track is unnecessary.
not affect the normal operation of any other trains, thus train i + 1’s switching track is unnecessary.

Figure 6.
Figure Delayanalysis
6. Delay analysisfor train ii ++11in
for train incase
case1.1.

However, ifif TTi+1,B −

However, − ((TTi,B +
+D < TT,, train
Di,BC)) < train ii +
+ 11 have
have to
to decelerate
decelerate in
in consideration
consideration of
of C3,
C3,then
then
i +1, B i,B i , BC
we have
we have Zoi+1 = Ti,B + Di,BC + T
f (1)
Zi+ o 1 = Ti+1,B
Zi +1 = Ti, B + Di , BC + T
f train i + 1 can be calculated by
Accordingly, the conflict train delay of (1)
Zi +1 = Ti +1, B
Zi+1,i = Ti,B + Di,BC + T − Ti+1,B (2)
Accordingly, the conflict train delay of train i + 1 can be calculated by
Moreover, the operation of train i will not be affected by any other trains if train i + 1 travels on
dedicated track, thus we have Zi,i+1 = 0. Obviously, no outbound trains will be delayed since the
outbound track in segment BC will not be utilized by any inbound trains in case 1.
 Moreover, the operation of train i will not be affected by any other trains if train i + 1 travels on
dedicated track, thus we have Z i , i +1 = 0 . Obviously, no outbound trains will be delayed since the
outbound track in segment BC will not be utilized by any inbound trains in case 1.
Sustainability 2019, 11, 2351 9 of 20
Finally, the total conflict train delay here equals to that of train i + 1, which can be calculated by

Finally, the total conflict Ti , B +delay

train + T equals
Di , BChere − Ti +1, Bto thatotherwise
of train i + 1, which can be calculated by
Z (i, i + 1) =  (3)
(0Ti,B + Di,BC + T − Ti+1,B otherwise Ti +1, B − (Ti , B + Di , BC ) ≥ T
Z(i, i + 1) = (3)
0 Ti+1,B − (Ti,B + Di,BC ) ≥ T

3.2.2.
3.2.2.Case
Case22Normal
NormalTrain
Train Traveling
Traveling on
on Reverse
Reverse Direction
Direction Track
Track
IfIf we
we reschedule
reschedule inbound
inboundnormal
normaltrain trainii++11to totravel
travelon onreverse
reversedirection
directiontrack trackin insegment
segmentBC, BC,
there are two kinds of potential conflicts between train i + 1 and other
there are two kinds of potential conflicts between train i + 1 and other trains, leading to differenttrains, leading to different
delays.
delays.
One is theOnehead-on
is the head-on
conflicts conflicts
between train between
i + 1train
and thei + outbound
1 and the trains
outbound trainsk);(i.e.,
(i.e., train train k);isthe
the second the
second is the rear-end conflicts between train i + 1 and
rear-end conflicts between train i + 1 and the inbound trains (i.e., train i).the inbound trains (i.e., train i).
To
To analyze
analyze these
these two
two types
types of of conflicts
conflicts in in detail,
detail, wewe divide
divide case
case 22 into
into twotwo subcases,
subcases, namely
namely
subcase
subcase 2.1 2.1 and
and subcase
subcase 2.2,
2.2, which
which willwill be be discussed
discussed respectively
respectively below.
below.
(1)
(1)Subcase
Subcase 2.1
2.1 Delay
Delay analysis
analysis of of train
train ii ++11andandtrain
trainkk
da
In
Inthethecondition
conditionthatthat TTk,B − TTi++1,1,B
k ,B − B ≥ ≥HHi +1, k ,, train
da train ii ++1’s
1’sarrival
arrivaltime
timeatatnode
nodeBBisisearlier
earlierthan
thantrain
train
i+1,k
da , which means C1 can always be satisfied
Hida
headway H
kkand
andthe
thetime
timeinterval
intervalisislonger
longerthan
thantime
timeheadway
k , which means C1 can always be satisfied
+1,1,k
+
while train k traveling with normal speed on dedicated track.
while train k traveling with normal speed on dedicated track.

Figure 7. Delay analysis for train k in case 2.

Figure 7. Delay analysis for train k in case 2.
However, if 0 < Tk,B − Ti+1,B < Hida , timetable shown in Figure 7b will be obtained, in this
da+1,k
However, if 0 < Tk , B − Ti +1, B < H i +1,
situation train k’s arrival time is later than train k , timetable shown
i + 1 but in interval
the time Figure 7b will bethan
is shorter obtained,
Hda ,intrain
thisk
i+1,k
still needs
situation to decelerate
train k’s arrivalbefore
time isreaching trainB.i If
node
later than + 1Tbut
k,B −the
Ti+time
1,B ≤interval
0, timetable shown
is shorter Hida+1,k 7c
in Figure
than will
, train
be obtained, in which the planned arrival time for train i + 1 at node B is later than train k. Therefore,
k still needs to decelerate before reaching node B. If Tk , B − Ti +1, B ≤ 0 , timetable shown in Figure 7c
in the condition that Tk,B − Ti+1,B < Hida +1,k
, train k needs to reduce its speed in segment AB because
of C1, and the dash line in blue color in Figure 7a highlights the track where train k travels below
f
normal speed. Moreover, in both Figure 7b,c, we have Zok = Ti+1,B + Hida +1,k
and Zk = Tk,B . Then, the
conflict train delay of train k caused by train i + 1, in the condition that Tk,B − Ti+1,B < Hida
+1,k
, can be
calculated by
f
Zk,i+1 = Zok − Zk = Ti+1,B + Hida
+1,k − Tk,B (4)
Sustainability 2019, 11, 2351 10 of 20

Then, according the above-mentioned analysis in this subsection, the delay time of outbound
train k in case 2 can be calculated by

 0

 Tk,B − Ti+1,B ≥ Hida
+1,k
Zk,i+1 = (5)
 Ti+1,B + Hida

+1,k
− Tk,B otherwise

Obviously, there is no delay for train i + 1 in this subcase, i.e., Zi+1,k = 0.

(2) Subcase 2.2 Delay analysis of train i + 1 and train i
According to the discussion in Section 3.2.1, the condition that Ti+1,B − (Ti,B + Di,BC ) < T is true
when train i + 1 is rescheduled to travel on the reverse direction track. Specifically, we will consider
to reschedule train i + 1 to travel on reverse direction track only in the condition that train i + 1 will
experience time delay on dedicated track. Moreover, safety constraint C2 should be taken into account
when train i + 1 travels on reverse direction track.
For detailed analysis, we divide the condition that Ti+1,B − (Ti,B + Di,BC ) < T into three scenarios,
namely Ti,B + Di,BC − Ti+1,B ≥ Hiaa+1,i and 0 < Ti,B + Di,BC − Ti+1,B < Hiaa+1,i and 0 ≤ Ti+1,B − (Ti,B +
Di,BC ) < T, and each scenario will be discussed respectively. First, in the condition that Ti,B + Di,BC −
Ti+1,B ≥ Hiaa+1,i , the arrival time of train i + 1 at node B is earlier than train i and the time difference
is no less than Hiaa+1,i , thus, there is no conflict between train i + 1 and train i in case 2, then we have
Zi,i+1 = 0.
However, if 0 < Ti,B + Di,BC − Ti+1,B < Hiaa+1,i or 0 ≤ Ti+1,B − (Ti,B + Di,BC ) < T is true, train i + 1
will conflict with train i because of C2, which leads to conflict train delay of train i. In Figure 8a, the
dash line in blue color highlights the track where train i is delayed by train i + 1 and the dash line in
red color highlights the part of track where train i decelerates due to contingencies. Both in Figure 8b,c,
we have
f
Zi = Ti,B + Di,BC
(6)
Zoi = Ti+1,B + Hiaa+1,i

Then, conflict train delay of train i caused by train i + 1 can be calculated by

f
Zi,i+1 = Zoi − Zi = Ti+1,B + Hiaa+1,i − (Ti,B + Di,BC ) (7)

Based on the aforementioned analysis, the conflict train delay of train i in case 2 can be calculated by

 0

 Ti,B + Di,BC − Ti+1,B ≥ Hiaa+1,i
Zi,i+1 = (8)
 Ti+1,B + Hiaa+1,i − (Ti,B + Di,BC )
 otherwise

For train i + 1, no conflict train delay will be obtained in case 2, i.e., Zi+1,i = 0.
In conclusion, the total conflict train delay of train i, i + 1 and k in the case that train i + 1 chooses
to travel on the reverse direction track can be calculated by

Z(i, i + 1, k) = Zk,i+1 + Zi,i+1 (9)

where Zk,i+1 and Zi,i+1 can be calculated by Equations (5) and (8), respectively.
 In conclusion, the total conflict train delay of train i, i + 1 and k in the case that train i + 1 chooses
to travel on the reverse direction track can be calculated by

Z (i , i + 1, k ) = Z k ,i +1 + Z i ,i +1 (9)
Sustainability 2019, 11, 2351 11 of 20
where Z k ,i +1 and Z i , i +1 can be calculated by Equation (5) and Equation (8), respectively.

Delayanalysis
Figure8.8.Delay
Figure analysisfor traini iin
fortrain incase
case2.2.

3.3. Adaptive Rescheduling Strategy

3.3. Adaptive Rescheduling Strategy
Based on the aforementioned analysis in Sections 3.1 and 3.2, we propose an adaptive rescheduling
Based on the aforementioned analysis in Sections 3.1 and 3.2, we propose an adaptive
strategy in this section. Without loss of generality, we assume that the trains experiencing contingencies
rescheduling strategy in this section. Without loss of generality, we assume that the trains
travel at a constant speed that below normal speed. All the decelerating trains travel on dedicated
experiencing contingencies travel at a constant speed that below normal speed. All the decelerating
tracks and all the normal trains can keep their current running state. The first train starts at time t0 = 0.
trains travel on dedicated tracks and all the normal trains can keep their current running state. The
For more details, we can see the following rules designed for the proposed strategy.
first train starts at time t0 = 0. For more details, we can see the following rules designed for the
proposed
 Rulesstrategy.
for rescheduling trains
• Rules
Train fori + rescheduling
1 is a normal trains
train and its front train i is a decelerating train that starts to decelerate at
t. Wei set
timeTrain + 1 is a normal train three
up the following conditions:
and its front train(a) i isthere is a node between
a decelerating train thattrain i and
starts train i + 1at
to decelerate at
timet.t;We
time (b) set
the up
reverse directionthree
the following for train i +(a)
trackconditions: 1 in its next
there segment
is a node is nottrain
between occupied
i and by any
train i +other
1 at
(c) the risk of rear-end collision does exist if train i +
time t; (b) the reverse direction track for train i + 1 in its next segment is not occupied by any speed
trains; 1 travels behind train i at normal other
on dedicated
trains; tracks.
(c) the risk At time t,collision
of rear-end if any one of exist
does the conditions
if train i +(a) and (b)behind
1 travels and (c)train
is noti at
satisfied,
normalwe will
speed
reschedule
on dedicated train i + 1At
tracks. to time
travelt, on dedicated
if any one of track; otherwise,
the conditions (a)ifand
condition
(b) and(a)(c)and (b) and
is not (c) arewe
satisfied, allwill
met,
train i + 1’s track choice is decided by the delay comparison between aforementioned
reschedule train i + 1 to travel on dedicated track; otherwise, if condition (a) and (b) and (c) are all case 1 and case
2: if train
met, the conflict trainchoice
i + 1’s track delay in case 1 isby
is decided greater thancomparison
the delay i + 1 uses
case 2, trainbetween reverse direction
aforementioned casetrack to
1 and
overtake
case train
2: if the i in itstrain
conflict nextdelay
segment; otherwise,
in case 1 is greater i + 1case
trainthan travels on dedicated
2, train track. direction track
i + 1 uses reverse
to overtake train i in its next segment; otherwise, train i + 1 travels on dedicated track. (Algorithm 1).
We here develop the path-selecting algorithm to clarify the proposed strategy
Parameter Ψ and Θ are used to record the numbers of trains which satisfy judgement conditions.
Respectively, n and N denote the index of train and the total number of trains.
Sustainability 2019, 11, 2351 12 of 20

Algorithm 1. Path-selecting Algorithm

Step 1. (Initialization) Inbound train i decelerates at time t in segment BC because of contingencies, Ψ = Θ = 0,
n = 1, i + 1 = k = 0 and Z(i,i + 1) = Z(i,i + 1,k) = 0.
Step 2. If n ≤ N, go to step 3; otherwise go to step 4
Step 3. Update Ψ , Θ, Z(i,i + 1) and Z(i,i + 1,k) according to the information of train n as follows.

(a) If train n is an inbound train following train i, and there is a node between train n and train i at time
t and the condition that Tn,B − (Ti,B + Di,BC ) < T is true, update Θ = Θ + 1, record this train’s ID as i
+ 1 = n, and calculate the total conflict train delay Z(i,i + 1) of train i and train i + 1 according to
Equation (3);
(b) If train n is an outbound train and travels on outbound track in segment BC, update Ψ = Ψ + 1,
then go to step 4;
(c) If train n is an outbound train and has not reached node B at time t, moreover train k is the head
train to pass node B, record train n’s ID as k = n, and calculate the total conflict train delay Z(i,i +
1,k) of train i, i + 1 and k according to Equation (9);
(d) Otherwise, Θ = Θ, Ψ = Ψ .

Then, n = n + 1. If n = i, update n = n + 1. Lastly, go to step 2.

Step 4. If Θ > 0, Ψ = 0 and Z(i,i + 1) > Z(i,i + 1,k), train i + 1 will be rescheduled to travel on reverse direction
track; otherwise, train i + 1 travels on its dedicated track.

3.4. Performance Evaluation Criteria for Rescheduling Strategies

To accurately evaluate the efficiency of the train rescheduling strategy, this paper introduces a
performance evaluation criterion, termed as suppression rate of conflicts. Moreover, a universal but
effective performance evaluation criterion, i.e., total train delay, is also applied in this paper.
(1) The suppression rate of conflicts, designed by this paper.

Zoi,total
P
i
η= P (10)
Di,total
i

where Di,total and Zoi,total , respectively, denote the total fixed train delay and the total conflict train delay
of train i from the starting station to the terminal station.
In fact, the application of different rescheduling strategies under the same contingencies may
lead to different total conflict train delay, while total fixed train delay remains unchanged. Therefore,
the strategy with minimum total conflict train delay tends to be the optimal one among all the
strategies applied.
Obviously, the less value of η is, the more efficient the corresponding strategy can be.
(2) The total delay for all trains.
X
f
J1 = (aoi,Des − ai,Des ) (11)
i

f
where aoi,Des and ai,Des , respectively, denote the arrival time for train i at its terminal station in
obstacle-travel situation and free-travel situation.

4. Case Studies
In this section, numerical experiments on the Beijing-Tianjin intercity high-speed railway are
carried out to demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed strategy. In real-word Chinese HSR
operations, the TR-S approach is widely used by dispatchers for it is simple. Adaptively selecting
trains’ path is however ignored, thus we choose the TR-S approach as the comparison of the AR-S
approach in this paper. In practice, the Beijing-Tianjin HSR is a double-track railway line where each
4. Case Studies
In this section, numerical experiments on the Beijing-Tianjin intercity high-speed railway are
carried out to demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed strategy. In real-word Chinese HSR
operations, the 11,
Sustainability 2019, TR-S
2351approach is widely used by dispatchers for it is simple. Adaptively selecting 13 of 20
trains’ path is however ignored, thus we choose the TR-S approach as the comparison of the AR-S
approach in this paper. In practice, the Beijing-Tianjin HSR is a double-track railway line where each
track is
track is bi-directional.
bi-directional.Trains
Trainson onthis
thisline have
line havethethe
same
samespeed grade,
speed the maximal
grade, the maximal velocity for each
velocity train
for each
is 350 km/h. Figure 9 presents the sketch map of Beijing-Tianjin HSR with the planned
train is 350 km/h. Figure 9 presents the sketch map of Beijing-Tianjin HSR with the planned traveling traveling time
for a for
time normal train in
a normal each
train in segment. In practical
each segment. operations,
In practical most high-speed
operations, trains on
most high-speed Beijing-Tianjin
trains on Beijing-
Tianjin HSR do not dwell at any intermediate stations, while the other few trains only dwellfor
HSR do not dwell at any intermediate stations, while the other few trains only dwell at Wuqing at
1 min. Allfor
Wuqing trains canAll
1 min. switch
trainstracks
can at each tracks
switch station.atAccording to the
each station. real-life operation
According data, we
to the real-life can set
operation
some parameters of the numerical experiments to Hiaa+1,i = Hida =T= aa 3 min. da
+1,kto H i +1,i = H i +1, k = T = 3 min .
data, we can set some parameters of the numerical experiments

Figure 9.
Figure Sketchmap
9. Sketch map of
of Beijing-Tianjin
Beijing-Tianjin intercity
intercity high-speed
high-speed railway.

4.1. Case Study 1

4.1. Case Study 1
In this experiment, we use aforementioned two rescheduling approaches, i.e., TR-S approach
In this experiment, we use aforementioned two rescheduling approaches, i.e., TR-S approach
and AR-S approach, to reschedule the first thirty inbound trains and thirty outbound trains on
and AR-S approach, to reschedule the first thirty inbound trains and thirty outbound trains on
Beijing-Tianjin HSR. Let train i (i = 1, 2, 3, . . . , 30) be the thirty outbound trains (Beijing → Tianjin) and
Beijing-Tianjin HSR. Let train i (i = 1, 2, 3, …, 30) be the thirty outbound trains (Beijing → Tianjin) and
train k (k = 31, 32, 33, . . . , 60) be the thirty inbound trains (Tianjin → Beijing). The first train is train 1
train k (k = 31, 32, 33, …, 60) be the thirty inbound trains (Tianjin → Beijing). The first train is train 1
and its departure time at starting station is t0 = 0 min.
and its departure time at starting station is t0 = 0 min .
As the approaches mentioned in this paper are specifically applied in the situation where
As the approaches
some trains traveling on mentioned
segmentindecelerate
this paperdueare specifically appliedtherefore,
to contingencies, in the situation
in ourwhere some
numerical
trains traveling on segment decelerate due to contingencies, therefore, in our numerical
experiment, we need to randomly select some trains as decelerating train and make some assumptions experiment,
we need to randomly
reasonably. select
Table 3 lists thesome trains as trains
decelerating decelerating
and the train and make some
corresponding assumptions
assumptions, reasonably.
where Dmoment
Table 3 lists the decelerating trains and the corresponding assumptions, where D moment and Dsegment
and Dsegment indicate the time when the decelerating train starts to decelerate and the segment where
indicate the time
contingencies occur.when the decelerating train starts to decelerate and the segment where
contingencies occur.
Table 3. Assumptions for decelerating trains.
Table 3. Assumptions for decelerating trains.
Decelerating Trains Dsegment Dmoment Fixed Train Delay
Decelerating Trains Dsegment Dmoment Fixed Train Delay
train 1 Beijing-Yizhuang 3 min 20 min
train
train113 Beijing-Yizhuang
Yongle-Wuqing 1533 min
min 1920min
min
train 1323
train Yongle-Wuqing
Beijing-Yizhuang 153min
241 min 1019min
min
train
train 2327 Yizhuang-Yongle
Beijing-Yizhuang 288
241min
min 2610min
min
train 27 Yizhuang-Yongle 288 min 26 min
Figures 10 and 11, respectively, present the train timetables rescheduled by TR-S approach and
AR-S approach under the same conditions. As shown in Figure 10, because of the inflexibility of TR-S
approach that allows no train to switch tracks, all the normal trains behind decelerating train 1, 13,
23 and 27 are delayed. Moreover, in Figure 10, we find that shorter departure interval between a
Sustainability 2019, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 14 of 20

Figures 10 and 11, respectively, present the train timetables rescheduled by TR-S approach and
AR-S approach under the same conditions. As shown in Figure 10, because of the inflexibility of TR-
Sustainability 2019, 11, 2351 14 of 20
S approach that allows no train to switch tracks, all the normal trains behind decelerating train 1, 13,
23 and 27 are delayed. Moreover, in Figure 10, we find that shorter departure interval between a
deceleratingtrain
decelerating trainandand its
its following
following normal
normal train
train tends
tends to
to cause
cause longer
longer conflict
conflict train
train delay
delay in
in practical
practical
train operation.
train operation.

(a)

(b)

Figure 10.
Figure 10. Timetables
Timetablesrescheduled
rescheduledbybyTR-S
TR-S approach.
approach. (a)(a) Timetable
Timetable on on inbound
inbound lines.
lines. (b) (b) Timetable
Timetable on
on outbound
outbound lines.
lines.

As
As shown
shown in in Figure
Figure 11,11, outbound
outbound trains
trains 2,2, 24
24 and
and 2828 choose
choose toto use
use reverse
reverse direction
direction track
track to
to
overtake
overtake front
frontdecelerating
deceleratingtrains.
trains. Train
Train22successfully
successfullyavoidsavoidsconflicts
conflictswith
withany anyother
othertrains.
trains. Though
Though
the
the utilization
utilization of of the
the reverse
reverse direction
direction track
track of
of trains
trains 24 24 and
and 2828 conflicts
conflicts with
with trains
trains 23
23 and
and 49,
49, which
which
delays
delays train
train 2323 and
and train
train 49
49 by
by 11 min
min and
and 55 min,
min, more
more total
total train
train delay
delay isis reduced
reduced by by AR-S
AR-S approach
approach
compared
comparedwith withTR-S
TR-Sapproach.
approach.Moreover,
Moreover,train train14 14isisrescheduled
rescheduledtototravel
travelon ondedicated
dedicatedtrack
trackbybyAR-S
AR-
approach
S approach because
because thethe
utilization of reverse
utilization of reverse direction
direction tracktrack
for train 14 would
for train 14 wouldnot reduce the total
not reduce the train
total
delay. Consequently,
train delay. letting letting
Consequently, train 14train
to travel
14 toontravel
dedicated tracks is tracks
on dedicated a betterisoption foroption
a better it can avoid
for it the
can
operation
avoid the of switching
operation of tracks.
switching tracks.
For
For moremore detailed
detailed comparison
comparison of of thethe performance
performance of of TR-S
TR-S approach
approach and and AR-S
AR-S approach,
approach, some
some
evaluation
evaluation criteria
criteria values
values associated
associated with these two approaches are listed in Table Table 4,4, where
where relative
relative
error ( ε==（
error εε (ε (VVAR−P −−V
AR − P VTD−P）
TD− P / VTD−P)) isis also
)/V
TD− P
also given.
given.
Sustainability 2019, 11, 2351 15 of 20
Sustainability 2019, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 15 of 20

(a)

(b)

Figure 11. Timetables rescheduledby

Timetables rescheduled byAR-S
AR-Sapproach.
approach.(a)
(a)Timetable
Timetableonon inbound
inbound lines.
lines. (b)(b) Timetable
Timetable on
on outbound
outbound lines.
lines.

From Table 4, we can see that all the performance evaluation criteria of AR-S approach are
superior to
to those
thoseofofTR-S
TR-Sapproach.
approach.Especially thethe
Especially suppression
suppressionraterate
of conflicts η), compared
(i.e.,(i.e.,
of conflicts η), comparedwith
TR-S TR-S
with approach, the AR-S
approach, approach
the AR-S reduces
approach η byη60%.
reduces ThisThis
by 60%. is because AD-S
is because AD-Sallows
allowsnormal
normal trains to
trains
overtake
to front
overtake decelerating
front deceleratingtrains byby
trains using reverse
using direction
reverse tracks,
direction which
tracks, whichincreases
increases thethe
flexibility of
flexibility
thethe
of rescheduling
rescheduling strategy.
strategy.

Results and
Table 4. Results
Table and related
related comparisons for two train rescheduling approaches.

Train Rescheduling Approach/ε

Train Rescheduling Approach/ε TR-S TR-S
AR-S ε (%)
AR-S ε (%)
η η 0.667 0.667
0.267 0.267
60% 60%
J1 (min)
J1 (min) 125 125
95 24%95 24%

Moreover,
Moreover, the
the AR-S
AR-S approach
approach can
can reduce
reduce the
the total
total train
train delay
delay by
by 24%
24% in comparison to
in comparison to TR-S
TR-S
approach.
approach. In practice, the reduction of total train delay not only improves customer satisfaction with
In practice, the reduction of total train delay not only improves customer satisfaction with
rail
rail services,
services, but
but also
also reduces energy consumption
reduces energy consumption in in railway
railway operations.
operations.

4.2.
4.2. Case
Case Study
Study 22
In
In case
case study
study 2,2, all
all trains
trains that
that departure
departure from
from initial
initial station
station between
between 10:00
10:00 a.m.
a.m. and
and 12:00
12:00 p.m.
p.m.
are
are considered.
considered. Different
Different from
from case
case study
study 1,
1, more
more trains
trains are
are involved,
involved, i.e.,
i.e., 58
58 inbound
inbound trains
trains and
and 60
60
outbound trains, moreover, the average departure interval is shorter and the total fixed train
outbound trains, moreover, the average departure interval is shorter and the total fixed train delay are delay
are assumed
assumed tolonger.
to be be longer. Assumptions
Assumptions for decelerating
for decelerating trains
trains are listed
are listed in Table
in Table 5. 5.
Sustainability 2019, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 16 of 20

Table 5. Assumptions for decelerating trains.

Decelerating
Sustainability 2019, 11,Trains
2351 Direction Dsegment Dmoment Fixed Train Delay
16 of 20
C2041 Outbound Beijing-Yizhuang 313 min 15 min
C2069 Outbound Beijing-Yizhuang 585 min 20 min
C2085 Table
Outbound5. Assumptions for decelerating
Yongle-Wuqing trains.
774 min 20 min
C2046 Trains
Decelerating Inbound
Direction Wuqing-Yongle
Dsegment 451 min
Dmoment 15Train
Fixed min Delay
C2100 Inbound Wuqing-Yongle 970 min 24 min
C2041 Outbound Beijing-Yizhuang 313 min 15 min
C2069 Outbound Beijing-Yizhuang 585 min 20 min
As show in Figure 12a, train
C2085 C2100 decelerates
Outbound in Wuqing-Yongle
Yongle-Wuqing segment due to20
774 min contingencies,
min
causing time delays of the following two trains, i.e., C2102 and C2580. However, in Figure
C2046 Inbound Wuqing-Yongle 451 min 15 13a, C2102
min
C2100to travel on reverse
is rescheduled Inbound
direction Wuqing-Yongle 970 segment,
track in Wuqing-Yongle min which24 min C2580
enables
to maintain normal running status because of the relatively large departure interval between C2100
and C2580.
As show in Figure 12a, train C2100 decelerates in Wuqing-Yongle segment due to contingencies,
As time
causing showdelays
in Figure 12bfollowing
of the train C2043,
twoC2227
trains,and
i.e., C2087
C2102 are
andall delayed
C2580. by frontindecelerating
However, trains.
Figure 13a, C2102
As presented in Figure 13b, C2043 and C2227 are rescheduled to travel on reverse direction
is rescheduled to travel on reverse direction track in Wuqing-Yongle segment, which enables C2580 track,
which
to causes
maintain time delays
normal running of status
inbound train C2218
because and C2588large
of the relatively (see departure
Figure 13a). Train between
interval C2087 does not
C2100
switch tracks
and C2580. according to AR-S approach.

(a)

(b)

Figure 12.
Figure 12. Timetables
Timetablesrescheduled
rescheduledby
byTR-S
TR-Sapproach.
approach.(a)(a) Timetable
Timetable onon inbound
inbound lines.
lines. (b)(b) Timetable
Timetable on
on outbound
outbound lines.
lines.
Sustainability 2019, 11, 2351 17 of 20
Sustainability 2019, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 17 of 20

(a)

(b)

Figure13.
Figure 13.Timetables
Timetablesrescheduled
rescheduled
byby AR-S
AR-S approach.
approach. (a)(a) Timetable
Timetable on on inbound
inbound lines.
lines. (b) Timetable
(b) Timetable on
on outbound
outbound lines.
lines.

Experimental
As results
show in Figure 12b in Table
train 6 illustrates
C2043, C2227 andthat AR-Sare
C2087 approach canby
all delayed reduce conflict traintrains.
front decelerating delay
more efficiently in comparison with TR-S approach.
As presented in Figure 13b, C2043 and C2227 are rescheduled to travel on reverse direction track,
which causes time delays of inbound train C2218 and C2588 (see Figure 13a). Train C2087 does not
Table 6. Results
switch tracks according to AR-Sandapproach.
related comparisons for two train rescheduling approaches.
Experimental results
TraininRescheduling
Table 6 illustrates that AR-S approach
Approach/ε TR-S canAR-S
reduce conflict
ε (%) train delay more
efficiently in comparison with TR-S approach.
η 0.691 0.287 58.5%
J1 (min) 159 121 24%
Table 6. Results and related comparisons for two train rescheduling approaches.

5. Conclusions Train Rescheduling Approach/ε TR-S AR-S ε (%)

η delays in the situation
In order to reduce the total train 0.691 some
0.287
trains58.5%
suffer sudden deceleration
due to contingencies, this paperJ1proposed
(min) an adaptive159rescheduling
121 approach,
24% denoted by AR-S
approach. First, we analyzed the safety constraints that must be met in practical HSR systems.
Second, we discussed the total conflict train delays under different path choices. Third, an adaptive
rescheduling strategy which allows normal trains to switch tracks to overtake front decelerating
trains was developed. A performance evaluation criterion was specifically designed to evaluate train
Sustainability 2019, 11, 2351 18 of 20

5. Conclusions
In order to reduce the total train delays in the situation some trains suffer sudden deceleration due
to contingencies, this paper proposed an adaptive rescheduling approach, denoted by AR-S approach.
First, we analyzed the safety constraints that must be met in practical HSR systems. Second, we
discussed the total conflict train delays under different path choices. Third, an adaptive rescheduling
strategy which allows normal trains to switch tracks to overtake front decelerating trains was developed.
A performance evaluation criterion was specifically designed to evaluate train rescheduling approaches.
The traditional rescheduling approach, denoted by TR-S approach, which allows no train to switch
track was also introduced as a sharp contrast to AR-S approach.
It is known that the reverse direction track is forbidden for any trains due to safety issues in most
of current real-world high-speed railways (HSR) systems. With the continuous improvement of railway
information system [43], both the safety and reliability of train operation have been improved. For
example, the routing plan is much flexible because of the wide application of centralized-train-control
(CTC) equipment to HSR systems. The developed AR-S strategy is tested by numerical simulations
based on real-world train timetable on Beijing-Tianjin HSR line, which shows a good performance and
hopefully be programmed into the CTC equipment in future HSR systems.
This paper only considered the train rescheduling problem among homogeneous trains, thus the
developed AR-S strategy is not suitable for the practical operation with heterogeneous trains (e.g.,
some Europe railway systems). Train priority was also neglected in this paper, which is, however, an
involved factor in practical train rescheduling process. Therefore, train priority can be considered
in the future research. Moreover, rail freight is an important part of railway transportation, and is
important to sustainable traffic [44]. As described in Zunder et al. [45], the utilization of electric traction
for freight trains endows a massive advantage, by virtue of the ability to use power generated from
clean energy. As freight trains are much slower in comparison with high-speed trains, the developed
AR-S strategy can be applied to rescheduling freight trains more efficiently when the line condition
is allowable.
Finally, if a normal train is rescheduled to travel on a reverse direction track while the focus
track is in maintenance task, traveling time on this track will be prolonged for safety concern, which
inspires us that the future research can put emphasis on further analyzing train delays under different
circumstances so as to further enhance the feasibility of the proposed approach.

Author Contributions: All authors were involved in preparing the manuscript. Conceptualization, X.Y. and H.W.;
Funding acquisition, B.N. and H.D.; Methodology, S.P. and X.Y.; Project administration, Haichuan Tang; Resources,
Z.Y.; Supervision, B.N. and H.D.; Data curation, R.T.; Writing—original draft, S.P.; Writing—review & editing, X.Y.
and H.W.
Funding: This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Nos. 61790573, 61790570,
71701013), the Young Elite Scientists Sponsorship Program by CAST (No. 2018QNRC001), the Fundamental
Research Funds for the Central Universities (No. 2018JBM074), and the State Key Laboratory of Rail Traffic Control
and Safety (No. RCS2019ZZ001).
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References
1. Xu, P.; Corman, F.; Peng, Q.; Luan, X. A train rescheduling model integrating speed management during
disruptions of high-speed traffic under a quasi-moving block system. Transp. Res. Part B Methodol. 2017, 104,
638–666. [CrossRef]
2. Zhang, C.; Gao, Y.; Yang, L.; Kumar, U.; Gao, Z. Integrated optimization of train scheduling and maintenance
planning on high-speed railway corridors. Omega 2018. [CrossRef]
3. Wang, L.; Liu, Y.; Mao, L.; Sun, C. Potential impacts of China 2030 high-speed rail network on ground
transportation accessibility. Sustainability 2018, 10, 1270. [CrossRef]
4. Lu, S.; Huang, Y.; Zhao, Z.; Yang, X. Exploring the hierarchical structure of China’s railway network from
2008 to 2017. Sustainability 2018, 10, 3173. [CrossRef]
Sustainability 2019, 11, 2351 19 of 20

5. Tan, M. Delay situation of high speed railway based on train record data. Chin. Transp. Rev. 2018, 40, 58–64.
(In Chinese).
6. Pellegrini, P.; Marlière, G.; Rodriguez, J. Optimal train routing and scheduling for managing traffic
perturbations in complex junctions. Transp. Res. Part B Methodol. 2014, 59, 58–80. [CrossRef]
7. Cavone, G.; Dotoli, M.; Epicoco, N.; Seatzu, C. A decision making procedure for robust train rescheduling
based on mixed integer linear programming and data envelopment analysis. Appl. Math. Model. 2017, 52,
255–273. [CrossRef]
8. Samà, M.; Pellegrini, P.; D’Ariano, A.; Rodriguez, J.; Pacciarelli, D. On the tactical and operational train
routing selection problem. Transp. Res. Part C Emerg. Technol. 2017, 76, 1–15. [CrossRef]
9. Castillo, E.; Gallego, I.; Ureña, J.M.; Coronado, J.M. Timetabling optimization of a mixed double- and
single-tracked railway network. Appl. Math. Model. 2011, 35, 859–878. [CrossRef]
10. Xu, X.; Li, C.-L.; Xu, Z. Integrated train timetabling and locomotive assignment. Transp. Res. Part B Methodol.
2018, 117, 573–593. [CrossRef]
11. Yang, X.; Chen, A.; Wu, J.; Gao, Z.; Tang, T. An energy-efficient rescheduling approach under delay
perturbations for metro systems. Transp. B: Transp. Dyn. 2019, 7, 386–400. [CrossRef]
12. Cacchiani, V.; Caprara, A.; Toth, P. Scheduling extra freight trains on railway networks. Transp. Res. Part B
Methodol. 2010, 44, 215–231. [CrossRef]
13. Cacchiani, V.; Furini, F.; Kidd, M.P. Approaches to a real-world train timetabling problem in a railway node.
Omega 2016, 58, 97–110. [CrossRef]
14. Jiang, F.; Cacchiani, V.; Toth, P. Train timetabling by skip-stop planning in highly congested lines. Transp. Res.
Part B Methodol. 2017, 104, 149–174. [CrossRef]
15. Yang, X.; Li, X.; Gao, Z.; Wang, H.; Tang, T. A cooperative scheduling model for timetable optimization in
subway systems. IEEE Transact. Intell. Transp. Syst. 2013, 14, 438–447. [CrossRef]
16. Yang, X.; Chen, A.; Li, X.; Ning, B.; Tang, T. An energy-efficient scheduling approach to improve the utilization
of regenerative energy for metro systems. Transp. Res. Part C Emerg. Technol. 2015, 57, 13–29. [CrossRef]
17. Yang, X.; Li, X.; Ning, B.; Tang, T. An optimisation method for train scheduling with minimum energy
consumption and travel time in metro rail systems. Transp. B Transp. Dyn. 2015, 3, 79–98. [CrossRef]
18. Yang, X.; Li, X.; Ning, B.; Tang, T. A survey on energy-efficient train operation for urban rail transit. IEEE
Transact. Intell. Transp. Syst. 2016, 17, 2–13. [CrossRef]
19. Cacchiani, V.; Toth, P. Nominal and robust train timetabling problems. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 2012, 219, 727–737.
[CrossRef]
20. Hassannayebi, E.; Zegordi, S.H.; Yaghini, M. Train timetabling for an urban rail transit line using a lagrangian
relaxation approach. Appl. Math. Model. 2016, 40, 9892–9913. [CrossRef]
21. Kang, L.; Zhu, X. Strategic timetable scheduling for last trains in urban railway transit networks. Appl. Math.
Model. 2017, 45, 209–225. [CrossRef]
22. Caimi, G.; Kroon, L.; Liebchen, C. Models for railway timetable optimization: Applicability and applications
in practice. J. Rail Transp. Plan. Manag. 2017, 6, 285–312. [CrossRef]
23. Cacchiani, V.; Huisman, D.; Kidd, M.; Kroon, L.; Toth, P.; Veelenturf, L.; Wagenaar, J. An overview of recovery
models and algorithms for real-time railway rescheduling. Transp. Res. Part B Methodol. 2014, 63, 15–37.
[CrossRef]
24. Zhan, S.; Kroon, L.G.; Veelenturf, L.P.; Wagenaar, J.C. Real-time high-speed train rescheduling in case of a
complete blockage. Transp. Res. Part B Methodol. 2015, 78, 182–201. [CrossRef]
25. Samà, M.; Pellegrini, P.; D’Ariano, A.; Rodriguez, J.; Pacciarelli, D. Ant colony optimization for the real-time
train routing selection problem. Transp. Res. Part B Methodol. 2016, 85, 89–108. [CrossRef]
26. Gao, Y.; Kroon, L.; Schmidt, M.; Yang, L. Rescheduling a metro line in an over-crowded situation after
disruptions. Transp. Res. Part B Methodol. 2016, 93, 425–449. [CrossRef]
27. Šemrov, D.; Marsetič, R.; Žura, M.; Todorovski, L.; Srdic, A. Reinforcement learning approach for train
rescheduling on a single-track railway. Transp. Res. Part B Methodol. 2016, 86, 250–267. [CrossRef]
28. Bettinelli, A.; Santini, A.; Vigo, D. A real-time conflict solution algorithm for the train rescheduling problem.
Transp. Res. Part B Methodol. 2017, 106, 237–265. [CrossRef]
29. Gao, Y.; Yang, L.; Gao, Z. Real-time automatic rescheduling strategy for an urban rail line by integrating the
information of fault handling. Transp. Res. Part C Emerg. Technol. 2017, 81, 246–267. [CrossRef]
Sustainability 2019, 11, 2351 20 of 20

30. Binder, S.; Maknoon, Y.; Bierlaire, M. The multi-objective railway timetable rescheduling problem. Transp.
Res. Part C Emerg. Technol. 2017, 78, 78–94. [CrossRef]
31. Yang, X.; Yin, H.; Wu, J.; Qu, Y.; Gao, Z.; Tang, T. Recognizing the critical stations in urban rail networks: An
analysis method based on the smart-card data. IEEE Intell. Transp. Syst. Mag. 2019, 11, 29–35. [CrossRef]
32. Meng, L.; Zhou, X. Simultaneous train rerouting and rescheduling on an n-track network: A model
reformulation with network-based cumulative flow variables. Transp. Res. Part B Methodol. 2014, 67, 208–234.
[CrossRef]
33. Xu, X.; Li, K.; Yang, L. Rescheduling subway trains by a discrete event model considering service balance
performance. Appl. Math. Model. 2016, 40, 1446–1466. [CrossRef]
34. Altazin, E.; Dauzère-Pérès, S.; Ramond, F.; Tréfond, S. Rescheduling through stop-skipping in dense railway
systems. Transp. Res. Part C Emerg. Technol. 2017, 79, 73–84. [CrossRef]
35. Fischetti, M.; Monaci, M. Using a general-purpose mixed-integer linear programming solver for the practical
solution of real-time train rescheduling. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 2017, 263, 258–264. [CrossRef]
36. Ghaemi, N.; Zilko, A.A.; Yan, F.; Cats, O.; Kurowicka, D.; Goverde, R.M.P. Impact of railway disruption
predictions and rescheduling on passenger delays. J. Rail Transp. Plan. Manag. 2018, 8, 103–122. [CrossRef]
37. Sun, H.; Wu, J.; Ma, H.; Yang, X.; Gao, Z. A Bi-objective timetable optimization model for urban rail transit
based on the time-dependent passenger volume. IEEE Trans. Intell. Transp. Syst. 2019, 20, 604–615. [CrossRef]
38. Mu, S.; Dessouky, M. Efficient dispatching rules on double tracks with heterogeneous train traffic. Transp.
Res. Part B Methodol. 2013, 51, 45–64. [CrossRef]
39. Xu, X.; Li, K.; Yang, L. Scheduling heterogeneous train traffic on double tracks with efficient dispatching
rules. Transp. Res. Part B Methodol. 2015, 78, 364–384. [CrossRef]
40. Xu, Y.; Jia, B.; Ghiasi, A.; Li, X. Train routing and timetabling problem for heterogeneous train traffic with
switchable scheduling rules. Transp. Res. Part C Emerg. Technol. 2017, 84, 196–218. [CrossRef]
41. Tolliver, D.; Lu, P.; Benson, D. Comparing rail fuel efficiency with truck and waterway. Trans. Res. Part D
Transp. Environ. 2013, 24, 69–75. [CrossRef]
42. Tolliver, D.; Lu, P.; Benson, D. Railroad energy efficiency in the United States: Analytical and statistical
analysis. J. Transp. Eng. 2014, 140, 23–30. [CrossRef]
43. Cao, Y.; Li, P.; Zhang, Y. Parallel processing algorithm for railway signal fault diagnosis data based on cloud
computing. Future Gener. Comp. Syst. 2018, 88, 279–283. [CrossRef]
44. Aditjandra, P.T.; Zunder, T.H.; Islam, D.M.Z.; Palacin, R. Green rail transportation: improving rail freight to
support green corridors. In Green Transportation Logistics: The Quest for Win-Win Solutions; Springer: Cham,
Switzerland, 2016; pp. 413–454.
45. Zunder, T.H.; Islam, D.M.Z.; Mortimer, P.N.; Aditjandra, P.T. How far has open access enabled the growth of
cross border pan European rail freight? A case study. Res. Transp. Bus. Manag. 2013, 6, 71–80. [CrossRef]

© 2019 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).