1 / 33

Dynamic Ride-sharing Systems: a Case Study in Metro Atlanta

Dynamic Ride-sharing Systems: a Case Study in Metro Atlanta. Niels Agatz Joint work with Alan Erera, Martin Savelsbergh, Xing Wang ARC February 26, Atlanta. Motivation. Observations Congestion is a major issue in urban areas around the world Congestion leads to Loss of productivity

Download Presentation

Dynamic Ride-sharing Systems: a Case Study in Metro Atlanta

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Dynamic Ride-sharing Systems: a Case Study in Metro Atlanta Niels Agatz Joint work with Alan Erera, Martin Savelsbergh, Xing Wang ARC February 26, Atlanta

  2. Motivation • Observations • Congestion is a major issue in urban areas around the world • Congestion leads to • Loss of productivity • Wasted fuel • Pollution • Private car occupancies are low • Average of 1.8 for leisure trips • Average of 1.1 for commuting trips

  3. Motivation • Opportunity • Effective use of empty car seats can • Reduce congestion • Reduce fuel consumption • Reduce pollution • Increase productivity • Enabling technology exists • GPS-enabled mobile devices • Mobile-to-mobile communication • Route guidance technology Dynamic Ride-Sharing

  4. Outline • Introduction to dynamic ride-sharing • A dynamic ride-share setting • Solving the problem • Simulation Metro Atlanta • Simulation Results

  5. Dynamic ride-sharing: basics • Announcement of trips • Matching of drivers and riders • Execution of identified trips • Sharing of trip costs Assumption: if no trip is identified, drivers and riders use their own carto reach destination

  6. Dynamic ride-sharing: features • Dynamic: established on short-notice • Non-recurring trips: different from carpooling • Automated matching: different from online notice-boards • Independent drivers: different from taxis • Cost-sharing: variable trip related expenses • Prearranged: different from spontaneous, casual ride-sharing

  7. Dynamic ride-sharing: providers • IPhone applications: • Carticipate (Aug. ‘08) • Avego (Dec. ‘08) • Google Android applications: • Piggyback (May ‘08) • Web-based: • Zebigo, PickupPal, Nuride, Rideshark, Ridecell, Goloco, Zimride, …, etc.

  8. What is in it for participants? • Save costs by sharing fuel expenses and tolls • Save time through use of HOV-lanes • Save the planet

  9. What is in it for providers? • Private: take a cut of the participant’s cost savings • Public (society): decrease external costs of transportation: emissions, pollution, and traffic congestion

  10. Objectives • Participants: ↓ travel costs • Private ride-share provider: ↓ total travel costs  ↑ cut • Society: ↓ pollution and traffic congestion • Objectives are aligned:↓ system-wide vehicle miles, win-win-win

  11. Ride-share Setting Trip Announcement: • Trips between origin - destination • Role: driver, rider or flexible • Participant wants to save $ • At most: a single driver - a single rider • No Transfers or multi-passenger trips

  12. Announcement: Time Information Departure time Announcement time Earliest Latest arrival time Latest Lead-time flexibility direct travel time time window for matching Relative to duration of trip?

  13. Round Trips • Most trips in practice are round trips • Announcement round trips: jointly or separately? • Rider may want assurance return ride before departure • Return trip alternatives?

  14. System Dynamics • New announcements continuously enter and leave the system! • People leave because • ride-share was found • Announcement expired

  15. Effectively Handling Dynamics • Run optimization at • specific time intervals; • After a given number of announcements. • Optimization Engine: • Input: trip announcements • Output: driver-rider matches • Commit tentative match as-late-as-possible! • shortly before latest departure of ride-share

  16. Effectively Dealing with Dynamics

  17. Effectively Dealing with Dynamics Expired Run 1

  18. Effectively Dealing with Dynamics Ride-share finalized Run 2

  19. Simulation Environment Based on traffic model data from ARC

  20. Ride-share Characteristics Focus: Home-based Work, SOV • Ride-share participation rate (bc2%) • Driver – Rider ratio (bc1:1) • Announcement lead-time (abs) (bc30 min) • Time flexibility (abs) (bc20 min)

  21. Announcement Generator • Randomly generate trip announcements based on o-d trip data: • 2024 Traffic Analysis Zones (TAZs) • # work-related round trips per day: 2.96 million • ~ 87% single occupancy trips • # O-D pairs: 2.90 million • max # trips per O-D pair: 881 • min # trips per O-D pair: 0.01

  22. Announcement Generator cont’d Generate time information: • Home-work • Draw latest departure: 7:30am, sd. 1h • Calculate: earl. departure, lat. arrival, announcement • Work-home • Draw time at work: 8 hour, sd. 30 min • Add time at work to announcement times

  23. Ride-share Scenarios • SEPAR: separate announcements for round trip, no guaranteed ride back • JOINT: joint announcement for round trip, guaranteed ride back (not necessarily with same driver!) • BOUND: all daily trips known upfront (no dynamics)

  24. Simulation Results ! -0.6% of total trips -8.2

  25. Sensitivity • Increase/ decrease participation rate More + better matches!

  26. Sensitivity cont’d • Flexible roles →success rate ↑ • ↑ time flexibility → success rate ↑ • response time ↓ → success rate ↓ • ↑ lead-time → success rate ↑

  27. Cost savings • Total daily system-wide savings: $53,000 • 20% cut Ride-share provider: $10,600 • Viable business model? • Avg. savings pp matched: $1.4 (20%) • Enough incentive to participate? Input: $0.55 per mile (AAA 2007)

  28. Environmental benefits • System-wide vehicle-miles: -105,519 • Vehicle Trips: -15,400 Emissions • Hydrocarbons: -650 lbs/ day • CO: -4000 lbs / day • Oxides of Nitrogen: -323 lbs/ day

  29. When can we find ride-shares? Density is good

  30. What if we offer awards? Subsidize ride-share by a fixed award per match No award Award = $0.55 Award = $1.10 +8% +2.5% $9,500 $19,000

  31. Under development • Study system performance over time • Key observations: • New participants try ride-sharing • Dissatisfied participants may stop announcing trips • Inspired by innovation diffusion models: • Inflow new users dependent on size of user pool! • Outflow depends on cumulative success rate

  32. Outlook • More realistic travel time settings • Time-dependent travel times • Behavioral modeling • Match acceptance • Cancelations • No-shows • Choices • …

  33. Thank You

More Related