Joint Optimization of Road Classification and Road

Capacity for Urban Freight Transportation Networks

Yipeng Ye, Ph.D. 1; Hua Wang, Ph.D. 2; Xiaoning Zhang, Ph.D. 3; and Rui Li, Ph.D. 4
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Universidad Militar Nueva Granada on 08/18/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Abstract: In previous studies, almost all urban network design models/methods made attempts to optimize transportation system perfor-
mance, such as minimizing road traffic congestion, by determining optimal road capacity expansion schemes, with the assumption of inde-
structible road infrastructure. However, road infrastructure definitely deteriorates over time, and needs periodic maintenance and repairs. This
paper proposes a bilevel programming model for the urban freight transportation network design problem (UFTNDP) by taking into account
the heterogeneity of road classifications and road damages from the perspective of road maintenance. The model aims to improve network
performance as much as possible by determining an optimal joint scheme of road capacities and classifications. At the upper level, road
planning aims to minimize total system cost by determining a joint optimal scheme of road capacities and road classifications. The lower level
is a traffic assignment problem that characterizes network users’ path choice behavior. We then propose an improved system optimum (SO)
relaxation–based method to solve the optimization model. Numerical examples validated the developed model and tested the computational
efficiency of the proposed algorithm. Numerical results revealed that (1) the improved solution algorithm performs better, because it saves
97.3% of computational time compared with the original SO relaxation–based method; (2) the algorithm has the potential to be extended to
solving a general discrete network design problem; and (3) a simultaneous optimization of road classification and capacity works better in
improving system performance of an urban freight transportation network. DOI: 10.1061/JTEPBS.0000446. © 2020 American Society of
Civil Engineers.
Author keywords: Discrete network design problem; Bilevel programming model; Road classification; User equilibrium; Improved
system optimum (SO) relaxation–based algorithm.

Introduction
Urban transportation plays an important role in promoting the eco-
nomic development of and social activities in cities. People often
regard road congestion as one of the most serious problems in ur-
ban transportation, and one that can be alleviated by building new
links and upgrading or enhancing existing roads. Such road capac-
ity expansion is defined as a network design problem (NDP) in the
literature. It usually is formulated as a bilevel programming (BLP)
model, in which the upper-level planner aims to improve transpor-
tation system performance by implementing optimal road capacity
expansion schemes subject to investment constraints, and the lower-
level users strive to optimize their routing decisions so as to minimize
respective travel costs. According to different traffic assignment
principles, lower-level problems can be differentiated further as user-
equilibrium (UE) problems, stochastic user-equilibrium (SUE) prob-
lems, and so forth. Based on traffic assignment principles, many
1
Lecturer, School of Economics and Management, Wuyi Univ.,
Guangdong 529020, China. Email: yeyipeng@foxmail.com
2 (2018) found that the backlog in America’s road and highway reha-
Senior Research Fellow, Dept. of Civil and Environmental Engi-
neering, National Univ. of Singapore, Singapore 117576, Singapore
(corresponding author). ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7150-5247.
Email: hwang191901@gmail.com
3
Professor, School of Economics and Management, Tongji Univ.,
Shanghai 200092, China. Email: cexzhang@tongji.edu.cn
4
Associate Professor, College of Civil and Transportation Engineering,
Hohai Univ., Nanjing 210098, China. ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001
-9692-3771. Email: lirui2012@hhu.edu.cn
Note. This manuscript was submitted on April 3, 2020; approved on
June 8, 2020; published online on August 14, 2020. Discussion period open
until January 14, 2021; separate discussions must be submitted for indivi-
dual papers. This paper is part of the Journal of Transportation Engineer-
ing, Part A: Systems, © ASCE, ISSN 2473-2907.
studies have proposed NDPs to drive users’ route choices and
achieve better network performance.
Although there are a vast number of NDP publications in the
literature, almost all previous studies assumed a unified road qual-
ity for all roads in the transportation network and overlooked the
heterogeneity of road damage maintenance costs. The differences
in road classifications and their actual conditions and qualities is
apparent in practice. Bumpy Roads Ahead (2018) reported that
about one-third of major urban roads in the US were poorly paved.
Road damage and maintenance costs are very important for road-
network planning and operation. For example, road damage creates
extra travel costs for road users. Martin and Thoresen (2015) re-
vealed that moving on damaged roads is estimated to cost US mo-
torists $80 billion in additional annual operating costs and vehicle
repairs. Quite a few studies and reports also have pointed out that
road maintenance costs cannot be negligible. Dueker and Fischer
(2003) indicated that road investment was about 1.6% of GDP dur-
ing 1963–1984 and that road maintenance costs accounted for a
large part of road expenses during this period. Bumpy Roads Ahead
bilitation was $419.5 billion and that the annual investment in road
maintenance should be increased to $61 billion to improve the con-
dition of America’s roads and highways.
Road damage is caused mainly by heavy goods vehicles (HGVs)
and highly depends on their loads (Dodoo and Thorpe 2005). The
severity of road damage is related to vehicle loads and road clas-
sifications. The relationship between vehicle loads and road dam-
age has been investigated. Highway Research Board (1962) found
that road damage cost is proportional to the fourth power of the
total weight of the vehicle. However, road classification also is an
important factor, because marginal road damage cost by equivalent
standard axles and fixed damage cost manifest very differently

© ASCE 04020122-1 J. Transp. Eng., Part A: Systems

J. Transp. Eng., Part A: Systems, 2020, 146(10): 04020122

 depending on road classification (Martin and Thoresen 2015).
Road classification is practical in urban network design. He et al.
(2008) illustrated that road classification should be designed based
on trip modes in urban areas, and analyzed road classification in the
city of Changzhou, China. Therefore, it is necessary and imperative
to incorporate road damage and road classification into the urban
freight transportation network design.
Little existing network design research has taken into account
road classification and capacity simultaneously. This paper focused
on the discrete network design problem (DNDP) that determines
the optimal number of lanes and road classification for each can-
didate link on the urban freight transportation network. Both private
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Universidad Militar Nueva Granada on 08/18/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
cars and freight trucks coexist on the transportation network. This
investigated (1) how to formulate a DNDP that incorporates road
classification and road damage, and also takes into account the
routing behavior of the two types of network users; and (2) how
to design a tailored solution algorithm so as to efficiently solve
the proposed DNDP model.
Literature Review
The urban transportation network design problem is concerned
mainly with expanding existing links or building new ones so
as to optimize network performance while accounting for trav-
elers’ route choice behavior. If the capacity of candidate links
is regarded as a continuous variable, then the NDP can be catego-
rized further as a continuous network design problem (CNDP)
(e.g., Liu and Wang 2015). In turn, if discrete variables of link
capacities, e.g., lane numbers, are considered, the problem falls
into the category of the DNDP (e.g., Wang et al. 2013). In addi-
tion, the mixed network design problem (MNDP) (e.g., Luathep
et al. 2011) takes into account both continuous and discrete de-
cision variables of link capacity expansion. Farahani et al. (2013)
gave a comprehensive survey of the literature and detailed
discussions.
Numerous studies have investigated the network design problem
under different assumptions. If the imperfect rationality of users is
considered, then the SUE principle is a reasonable extension of the
UE principle and can be adopted to formulate users’ route choice
behavior. Based on the SUE principle, Long et al. (2010) proposed
a network design model and a branch-and-bound–based method to
tackle the turning restriction design problem. Considering the multi-
dimensional measures of network design strategy (NDS), some re-
cent studies proposed multiobjective optimization models for the
network design problem. Szeto et al. (2010) simultaneously consid-
ered social, economic, and environmental impacts on humans and
proposed a multiobjective optimization model for the road-network
design problem.
In addition to the elements considered in existing network de-
sign studies, road damage also is an important problem facing
freight networks. Moreno-Quintero (2006) pointed out that in terms
of road-network quality, the major impact of freight transportation
is not congestion but rather road damage. Road damage is highly
dependent on road classification and the weights of freight trucks.
Martin and Thoresen (2015) pointed out that marginal road damage
cost caused by equivalent standard axles and fixed damage cost are
very different for various road classifications. Volovski et al. (2017)
indicated that the annual maintenance expense costs of roads highly
depend on road pavement types.
Although existing studies have considered different assump-
tions and proposed various network design models for urban
transportation networks, almost all network design models
implicitly suppose that a road can never perish and will serve
users forever. As argued previously, road damage should be
© ASCE 04020122-2
J. Transp. Eng., Part A: Systems, 2020, 146(10): 04020122
considered, and the road classification choice should be an
important part of the urban freight transportation network
design problem (UFTNDP). This paper addresses both these
problems.
We examine at the development of solution algorithms for vari-
ous NDPs. The NDP solution algorithms in the literature can be
categorized into two classes, heuristic and metaheuristic methods,
and exact methods. There are quite a few efficient heuristics, in-
cluding particle swarm optimization (Wang et al. 2015), the genetic
algorithm (Wang et al. 2019), the decomposition method (Dou et al.
2019) and the augmented Lagrangian method (Meng et al. 2001).
Exact methods include some classic global solution approaches for
NDPs, such as the branch-and-bound algorithm and the cutting
plane algorithm. For example, Leblanc (1975) developed a bilevel
programming model for the DNDP and proposed a branch-and-
bound algorithm to solve it. Farvaresh and Sepehri (2013) inves-
tigated a similar problem to Leblanc (1975) and proposed a tighter
lower bound (LB) to improve the solution algorithm. Wang et al.
(2013) proposed a system optimum (SO) relaxation–based method
to solve the DNDP, in which a feasible solution that satisfies the SO
principle is regarded as a lower bound of UE solutions, and suc-
cessive cutting planes may be added to increase this lower bound.
The main merit of this method is that it ensures a globally optimal
solution.
Another branch of exact solution algorithms seeks to reformu-
late the NDP as an equivalent mixed-integer linear program (MILP)
via linearization approximation. After that, the equivalent MILP
can be solved by state-of-the-art commercial solvers (e.g., CPLEX
and GUROBI) or advanced solution techniques. For instance,
Wang and Lo (2010) developed a linearized formulation to approxi-
mate a CNDP that can be solved by CPLEX. This method is widely
used in solving NDPs (Wang and Zhang 2017, Wang et al. 2014).
Luathep et al. (2011) extended this to investigate a MILP formu-
lation for the MNDP. Liu and Wang (2015) used a stochastic UE to
reformulate the NDP as a MILP and solved it by using a range
reduction technique. To the best of our knowledge, finding a fast
global optimization algorithm for the DNDP remains an open
problem.
Objectives and Contributions
The first objective of this work was to develop an optimization
model for the UFTNDP and thus find a network design scheme
with an optimal number of lanes and road classifications for each
candidate link. The second objective was to propose an improved
SO relaxation–based solution algorithm for the proposed UFTNDP
model.
To achieve these goals, we first formulated the UFTNDP as a
bilevel programming model. A road planner at the upper level op-
timizes the urban freight transportation network capacity expansion
scheme in terms of road classification and the number of lanes for
each candidate link, whereas freight and auto users at the lower
level make their respective route choices by following the UE prin-
ciple. This model is computationally challenging, because the bi-
level programming problem is a nonconvex programming problem.
Because heuristics and metaheuristics cannot guarantee a global
solution, we preferred the exact algorithm, and improved the one
proposed by Wang et al. (2013) from the perspective of searching
strategy. Wang et al. (2013)’s SO relaxation–based method always
generates a global solution to the DNDP. However, it always
searches several nonoptimal NDS and cuts off only one in each
iteration, so it needs many iterations and takes a long time to con-
verge. We improved the SO relaxation–based method through a
solver technique called solver callback, which can cut off multiple
J. Transp. Eng., Part A: Systems
 searched nonoptimal NDS in each iteration. It thus requires a very ya;n ∈ f0; 1g; ∀ a ∈ A2 ; n ∈ Na ð5Þ
limited number of iterations and less time to solve large-scale
problems.
This paper makes the following substantial contributions to the X X X
τ a;m;n xa;m ya;n ≤ B ð6Þ
literature. a∈A2 m∈Ma n∈N a
1. We propose a bilevel programming model for the UFTNDP to
determine the optimal road classification and number of lanes
where v = vehicle flow, which is controlled by lane parameter
for each candidate link. Existing studies have not considered the
vector y.
relationship between link travel time and road types. The pro-
The objective function Eq. (1) represents the total cost of the
posed model considers both travel time cost and road damage
urban transportation system, including road damage cost and travel
cost in order to pursue a reasonable NDS for an urban freight
cost. Constraint Eq. (2) means that exactly one road classification
transportation network. To the best of our knowledge, this is the
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Universidad Militar Nueva Granada on 08/18/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

can be chosen for each candidate link. Constraint Eq. (3) ensures
first urban transportation network design model that simultane-
that exactly one capacity can be chosen for each candidate link.
ously addresses travel time cost, road damage cost, and road
Constraints Eqs. (4) and (5) ensure that link level parameters xa;m
classification.
and lane parameters ya;n are binary decision variables. Constraint
2. We propose an improved SO relaxation–based method to solve
Eq. (6) guarantees that the road construction cost does not exceed
the UFTNDP model, which worked very well in the tested in-
the total budget.
stances. Moreover, it can be easily extended to solve a generic
Because objective function Eq. (1) and constraint Eq. (6) are
DNDP.
nonlinear, we introduce auxiliary variable za;m;n ¼ xa;m ya;n and re-
3. We also contribute some managerial insights. First, we found
place constraint Eq. (6) with equivalent linear constraints
that Braess’s paradox applies in numerical examples. This indi-
cates that larger link capacity expansion is not always better and X X X
that policy makers should optimize NDS carefully. Second, in τ a;m;n za;m;n ≤ B ð7Þ
addition to link capacity expansion, a proper choice of road clas- a∈A2 m∈M a n∈N a

sification for candidate links can help improve further the per-
formance of an urban freight transportation network.
za;m·n ≤ xa;m ; ∀ a ∈ A2 ; m ∈ M a ; n ∈ N a ð8Þ

Model Formulation za;m·n ≤ ya;n ; ∀ a ∈ A2 ; m ∈ M a ; n ∈ N a ð9Þ

The network design problem can be characterized as a Stackelberg
game between the road planner and network users. Unlike existing za;m·n ≥ xa;m þ ya;n − 1; ∀ a ∈ A2 ; m ∈ M a ; n ∈ N a ð10Þ
NDP studies, the system cost in this paper included road damage
cost and travel time cost. We assumed that road damage cost has
two parts: fixed cost, and damage cost by freight trucks. The fixed za;m·n ≥ 0; ∀ a ∈ A2 ; m ∈ M a ; n ∈ N a ð11Þ
cost is related to road classification and the number of lanes, which
can be seen as a fixed routine road maintenance cost. The damage
Because both xa;m and ya;n are binary variables, the auxiliary
cost from freight trucks is related to road classification and freight
variable za;m;n also is a binary variable. The equivalence can be
vehicle flow. This game can be formulated as a bilevel optimization
verified as follows:
model, in which the planner at the upper level determines the road
classifications and the capacities of candidate links to minimize the
total system cost of the urban freight transportation system, and the If xa;m ¼ 0 ⇒ za;m·n ¼ 0 derived by constraints Eqs:ð8Þ and ð11Þ
users choose routes to minimize their own total travel times. else if ya;n ¼ 0 ⇒ za;m·n ¼ 0 obtained by constraints Eqs:ð9Þ and ð11Þ
The road planner aims to minimize the total cost of the freight
transportation system. Thus, the upper-level programming can be else xa;m ¼ ya;n ¼ 1
formulated as follows: ⇒ za;m·n ¼ 1 actively bounded by constraints Eqs:ð8Þ−ð10Þ
X
min la ðcfixed
a þ cdam
a va Þ
F
x;y
a∈A1
In addition, we replace objective function Eq. (1) with the fol-
X X X  X
lowing equivalent objective function:
þ la xa;m a;m;n ya;n þ ca;m va
cfixed dam F
þα va ta ðva Þ X X X X
a∈A2 m∈Ma n∈N a a∈A1 min la ðcfixed
a þ cdam
a va Þ þ
F
la cfixed
a;m;n za;m;n
X X X x;y
a∈A1 a∈A2 m∈Ma n∈N a
þα xa;m ya;n va ta;m;n ðva Þ ð1Þ X X X
a∈A2 m∈Ma n∈N a þ a;m xa;m va þ α
la cdam F
va ta ðva Þ
a∈A2 m∈M a a∈A1
s.t. X X X
þα za;m;n va ta;m;n ðva Þ ð12Þ
X a∈A2 m∈M a n∈N a
xa;m ¼ 1; ∀ a ∈ A2 ð2Þ
m∈M a
The lower-level programming can be formulated as the follow-
X ing UE problem:
ya;n ¼ 1; ∀ a ∈ A2 ð3Þ
n∈N a
XZ va X X X Z va
min ta ðθÞdθ þ za;m;n ta;m;n ðθÞdθ ð13Þ
v
xa;m ∈ f0; 1g; ∀ a ∈ A2 ; m ∈ Ma ð4Þ a∈A1 0 a∈A2 m∈Ma n∈N a 0

© ASCE 04020122-3 J. Transp. Eng., Part A: Systems

J. Transp. Eng., Part A: Systems, 2020, 146(10): 04020122

 s.t. vFa;s ≥ 0; ∀ a ∈ A; s ∈ D ð18Þ
va ¼ vFa þ vPa ; ∀a∈A ð14Þ
X X
vPa;s − vPa;s ¼ qPi;s ; ∀ i ∈ N; s ∈ D ð19Þ
va ≤ Uð1 − ya;0 Þ; ∀ a ∈ A2 ð15Þ a∈iþ a∈i−

X X X
vFa;s − vFa;s ¼ qFi;s ; ∀ i ∈ N; s ∈ D ð16Þ vPa ¼ vPa;s ; ∀a∈A ð20Þ
a∈iþ a∈i−
s∈D
X
vFa ¼ vFa;s ; ∀a∈A ð17Þ
s∈D
vPa;s ≥ 0; ∀ a ∈ A; s ∈ D ð21Þ
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Universidad Militar Nueva Granada on 08/18/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

where
8 P
>
> − DFrs i¼s
>
< r∈O
qFi;s ¼ F
Drs i¼r; ∀ i ∈ N; r ∈ O; s ∈ D
>
>
>
:0 otherwise
8 P
>
> − DPrs i¼s
>
< r∈O
qPi;s ¼ P
Drs i ¼ r; ∀ i ∈ N; r ∈ O; s ∈ D
>
>
>
:0 otherwise

Constraints Eqs. (7)–(11) ensure that the total construction cost s.t.
does not exceed the total budget. Objective function Eq. (13) X
represents the equilibrium of the freight trucks and private cars. vFa ¼ vFa;m ; ∀ a ∈ A2 ð25Þ
m∈Ma
Constraint Eq. (14) ensures aggregate flow conservation on each
link. Constraint Eq. (15) ensures that there is no flow on a candidate 0 ≤ vFa;m ≤ Uxa;m ; ∀ a ∈ A2 ; m ∈ M a ð26Þ
link if that link has not been constructed. Constraints Eqs. (16)–(18)
ensure freight vehicle flow conservation. Constraints Eqs. (19)–(21) va ¼ vFa þ vPa ; ∀a∈A ð27Þ
ensure private car flow conservation.
We reformulated both the upper- and lower-level programs as va ≤ Uð1 − ya;0 Þ; ∀ a ∈ A2 ð28Þ
equivalent mixed-integer convex programs (MICPs) to handle them
easily. Wang et al. (2013) used similar preprocessing. We intro- 0 ≤ va;m;n ≤ Uza;m;n ; ∀ a ∈ A2 ; n ∈ N a ð29Þ
duced new variables va;m;n , ∀a ∈ A2 ; m ∈ M a ; n ∈ N a , vFa;m , and X X
∀a ∈ A2 ; m ∈ M a ; va;m;n denotes vehicle flow on link a if link a va ¼ va;m;n ; ∀ a ∈ A2 ð30Þ
is level m with n lane(s); vFa;m denotes freight vehicle flow on link a m∈M a n∈N a
if link a is type m. The bilevel programming Eqs. (1)–(21) can be
reformulated as follows. with constraints Eqs: ð16Þ–ð21Þ ð31Þ
For the original problem (OP), the upper-level programming is
Define
X X X X
la ðcfixed þ cdam Ωx;y
a va Þ þ
F
min a la cfixed
a;m;n za;m;n
x;y
a∈A1
X X X
a∈A2 m∈Ma n∈N a ≔fðx; yÞ∶x and y satisfy constraints Eqs: ð2Þ − ð5Þ and ð7Þ − ð11Þg
þ la cdam F
a;m va;m þα va ta ðva Þ
a∈A2 m∈M a a∈A1 Ωv ðx; yÞ
X X X
þα va;m;n ta;m;n ðva;m;n Þ ð22Þ ≔ fv∶v satisfies constraints Eqs: ð25Þ − ð31Þ under NDSðx; yÞg
a∈A2 m∈M a n∈N a
The bilevel programming can be abbreviated as follows:
X X X X
s:t: Eqs. ð2Þ−ð5Þ and ð7Þ−ð11Þ ð23Þ min la ðcfixed
a þ cdam
a va Þ þ
F
la cfixed
a;m;n za;m;n
ðx;yÞ∈Ωx;y
a∈A1 a∈A2 m∈Ma n∈N a
The lower-level programming is X X X
þ a;m va;m þ α
la cdam F va ta ðva Þ
XZ X X XZ
a∈A2 m∈M a a∈A1
va va;m;n X X X
min ta ðθÞdθ þ ta;m;n ðθÞdθ ð24Þ þα va;m;n ta;m;n ðva;m;n Þ ð32Þ
v 0 0
a∈A1 a∈A2 m∈Ma n∈N a a∈A2 m∈M a n∈N a

© ASCE 04020122-4 J. Transp. Eng., Part A: Systems

J. Transp. Eng., Part A: Systems, 2020, 146(10): 04020122

 where v solves the following UE problem:
X Z va X X XZ
min ta ðθÞdθ þ
v∈Ωv ðx;yÞ 0 0
a∈A1 a∈A2 m∈Ma n∈N a
In the UE problem [Eq. (33)], aggregate link flows va are
unique, because the UE problem is strictly convex for va. Once
aggregate link flows are given, the UE problem becomes a linear
optimization problem for vFa and vPa . Therefore, there may be
multiple solutions for vFa and vPa . When there exist multiple so-
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Universidad Militar Nueva Granada on 08/18/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
The difference between the OP and the RP is that the link flow
va;m;n
v ∈ Ωv ðx; yÞ in the RP and v ∈ ΩUE v ðx; yÞ in the OP. Because
ta;m;n ðθÞdθ ΩUE
v ðx; yÞ ⊆ Ωv ðx; yÞ, the RP is a relaxation of the OP. It follows
that the solution of the RP can help determine a lower bound of the
ð33Þ OP. The formal description of the SO relaxation–based method in
our proposed model is shown below.
1. Define a set Ω̄x;y ¼ ∅ that will contain all the generated solu-
tions. Define the upper bound UB ≔ þ∞, incumbent solution
ðxopt ; y opt Þ, relative optimality tolerance ε ≥ 0.
2. Solve the RP with the following constraints by dynamic outer
approximation method (which is introduced in the dynamic
outer approximation method):

lutions to the lower level traffic assignment problem, we here

focus on the best case where its corresponding traffic pattern
could ensure the most favorable system performance among X X X
all solutions. This implies that our model is indeed to tackle a ð1 − x̄a;m Þxa;m þ x̄a;m ð1 − xa;m Þ
min-min optimization problem. a∈A2 m∈M a m∈Ma
X X 
Once the urban network has been constructed with NDS
ðx ; y  Þ, aggregate vehicle flow v~ a can be solved by the Frank– þ ð1 − ȳa;n Þya;n þ ȳa;n ð1 − ya;n Þ ≥ 2;
n∈N a n∈N a
Wolfe algorithm and its improved variations, such as the conjugate
Frank–Wolfe algorithm and biconjugate Frank–Wolfe algorithm ∀ ðx̄; ȳÞ ∈ Ω̄x;y ð37Þ
(Mitradjieva and Lindberg 2013). Fixing aggregate flow v~ a, the best
vehicle responses for the road planner can be obtained by solving If the problem is infeasible, ðxopt ; y opt Þ is the optimal solution
the following linear optimization problem, which is referred to as and stop. Otherwise, obtain the provisional optimal solution de-
the best response problem (BRP): noted by ðx ; y  Þ and the provisional optimal value denoted
X X X X ObjRP of the DNDP under constraints Eq. (37). If ObjRP ≥

min  la ðcfixed
a þ cdam
a va Þ þ
F
la cfixed
a;m;n za;m;n ð1 − εÞUB, then ðxopt ; y opt Þ is the ε-optimal solution and stop.
v∈Ωv ðx ;y Þ
a∈A1 a∈A2 m∈M a n∈N a Otherwise go to Step 2.
X X X
þ la cdam  F
a;m xa;m va þα v~ a ta ðv~ a Þ 3. Solve the UE and BRP by fixing the value of ðx; yÞ at
a∈A2 m∈Ma a∈A1 ðx ; y  Þ and obtain the best response of the UE flow denoted
X X X by v. If
þα za;m;n v~ a ta;m;n ðv~ a Þ ð34Þ
a∈A2 m∈Ma n∈N a
X X X X

UB ≤ la ðcfixed
a þ cdam
a va Þ þ
F
la cfixed
a;m;n za;m;n
s.t. va ¼ v~ a ; ∀ a ∈ A. a∈A1 a∈A2 m∈M a n∈N a
X X X
þ a;m va;m þ α
la cdam F va ta ðva Þ
a∈A2 m∈M a a∈A1
Solution Algorithm X X X
þα va;m;n ta;m;n ðva;m;n Þ ð38Þ
a∈A2 m∈Ma n∈N a
Wang’s SO Relaxation–Based Method
This section implements the SO relaxation–based method on the
proposed model, then develops the improvement of the SO relax- then ðx ; y  Þ is not a better solution than ðxopt ; y opt Þ, and
ation–based method. The SO relaxation–based method defines hence set Ω̄x;y ¼ Ω̄x;y ∪ fðx ; y  Þg and go to Step 1. Other-
a relaxed problem (RP) for the DNDP, which is a MICP and wise, set
determines a lower bound for the DNDP. In this paper, the RP
is defined as X X X X

UB ¼ la ðcfixed
a þ cdam
a va Þ þ
F
la cfixed
a;m;n za;m;n
X a∈A1 a∈A2 m∈Ma n∈N a
min la ðcfixed
a þ cdam
a va Þ
F X X X
ðx;yÞ∈Ωx;y ;v∈Ωv ðx;yÞ
a∈A1 þ la cdam F
a;m va;m þα va ta ðva Þ
X X X X X a∈A2 m∈Ma a∈A1
þ a;m;n za;m;n þ
la cfixed la cdam F
a;m va;m
X X X
a∈A2 m∈Ma n∈N a a∈A2 m∈Ma þα va;m;n ta;m;n ðva;m;n Þ ð39Þ
X X X X a∈A2 m∈M a n∈N a
þα va ta ðva Þ þ α va;m;n ta;m;n ðva;m;n Þ ð35Þ
a∈A1 a∈A2 m∈Ma n∈N a
and ðxopt ; y opt Þ ¼ ðx ; y  Þ. If ObjRP ≥ ð1 − εÞUB, then ðxopt ; y opt Þ
Given a network design decision ðx; yÞ ∈ Ωx;y , we define the set is the ε-optimal solution, so stop. Otherwise, set Ω̄x;y ¼ Ω̄x;y ∪
of UE link flow as fðx ; y  Þg, and go to Step 1.
In the preceding method, the RP with constraints Eq. (37) is
XZ va
solved by the dynamic outer approximation method.
ΩUE
v ðx; yÞ ¼ arg min ta ðθÞdθ 1. Define functions T SO a ðva Þ ≔ va ta ðva Þ and T a;m;n ðva Þ ≔
SO
v∈Ωv ðx;yÞ
a∈A1 0 va ta;m;n ðva Þ, relative tolerance εSO ≥ 0, and threshold link flows
X X XZ va;m;n v̂a and v̂a;m;n .
þ ta;m;n ðθÞdθ ð36Þ 2. Introduce intermediate decision variables T̄ SO a for a ∈ A1
0
a;n for a ∈ A2 ; n ∈ N a. Define the following linear
and T̄ SO
a∈A2 m∈Ma n∈N a

© ASCE 04020122-5 J. Transp. Eng., Part A: Systems

J. Transp. Eng., Part A: Systems, 2020, 146(10): 04020122

 relaxation of the RP model (RP-revised), which is a MILP Algorithm 1. Improved SO relaxation–based method with solver
model: callback
X
la ðcfixed þ cdam 1. // Initialization
a va Þ
min F
a
2. Define functions T SO a ðva Þ ≔ va ta ðva Þ, T a;m;n ðva Þ ≔ va ta;m;
ðx;yÞ∈Ωx;y T̄≥0v∈Ωv ðx;yÞ a∈A SO
1
X X X nðva Þ, relative tolerances ε ≥ 0, ε ≥ 0, upper bound UB ≔
SO
þ la ðcfixed
a;m xa;m þ cdam
a;m va;m Þ þ α
F
T̄ SO
a þ∞, incumbent optimal strategy ðxopt ; y opt Þ. Introduce
a∈A2 m∈Ma a∈A1
a for a ∈ A1 , and T̄ a;m;n for
intermediate decision variables T̄ SO SO
X X X
þα T̄ SO
a;m;n ð40Þ a ∈ A2 , m ∈ M a , n ∈ N a .
a∈A2 m∈Ma n∈N a 3. Define linear relaxation problem of [RP]:
with constraints Eq. (37). X
3. Solve RP-revised and obtain the solution ðx ; y  ; T ; v Þ. For ½RP − revised ≔ min la ðcfixed
a xa þ cdam
a va Þ
F
ðx;yÞ∈Ωx;y ;T̄≥0;v∈Ωv ðx;yÞ a∈A
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Universidad Militar Nueva Granada on 08/18/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

each link a ∈ A1 , if va > v̂a and ½T SO 

a ðxa Þ − T̄ a =T̄ a
SO SO
> X X
1

ε =2, add constraint T̄ a ≥ ½ta ðva Þ þ ta ðva Þva ðva − va Þ þ

SO SO  0   þ la ðcfixed
a;m xa;m þ cdam
a;m va;m Þ
F

ta ðva Þva to RP-revised. For each link a ∈ A2 ; m ∈ M a and a∈A2 m∈Ma

X X X X
n ∈ N a , if va;m;n > v̂a;m;n and ½T SO 
a;m;n ðxa;m;n Þ − T̄ a;m;n =
SO
þα a þα
T̄ SO T̄ SO
a;m;n

T̄ a;m;n > ε =2, add constraint T̄ a;m;n ≥ ½ta;m;n ðva;m;n Þ þ
SO SO SO
a∈A1 a∈A2 m∈Ma n∈N a
0
ta;m;n ðva;m;n Þva;m;n ðva;m;n − va;m;n Þ þ ta;m;n ðva;m;n Þva;m;n to
RP-revised. If no constraint is added to RP-revised in this Make a copy of ½RP − revised as ½RP − copy.
step, then ðx ; y  ; T ; v Þ is an εSO -optimal solution of the 4. // Define callback function
RP with constraints. Otherwise, repeat Step 2. 5. function SO-relaxation-callback([RP-copy])
6. Get the new incumbent solution ðx ; y  ; T ; v Þ and best
bound ObjRP of ½RP − copy
Improvement to SO Relaxation–Based Method
7. Obtain system cost SC at fixed network strategy ðx ; y  Þ
There are two main bottlenecks in this method. First, only one NDS by solving UE flow and [BRP]
is cut off by solving a MICP in each iteration. Thus, this method 8. Implement Algorithm 2 (NDS cutting plane method) to
usually takes many iterations to ensure global optimality. In the update UB; ðxopt ; y opt Þ and cut off non-optimal solution
worst case, the method has to evaluate all NDSs. Second, solving 9. // Since (x ; y  ) is searched at this iteration, cut it off in
a MICP is time consuming, because it needs to solve a high number the next iteration
of MILPs using the dynamic outer-approximation method. 10. Exclude strategy (x ; y  ) from ½RP − revised
We considered generating cutting planes to cut off nonoptimal 11. Implement Algorithm 3 (OA cutting plane method)
NDSs effectively. During the solving procedure, commercial solv- 12. Add generated OA cutting planes to ½RP − revised
ers search branch-and-bound trees of MILPs, and multiple NDS are 13. end function
searched. However, only one NDS is cut off in each iteration after 14. // Main function for solving NDP
solving multiple MILPs, which is time consuming. Instead of solv- 15. function Main(½RP − revised)
ing a MICP completely to cut off one NDS, we cut off multiple 16. // Make a copy of ½RP − revised
NDS within the solution procedure. This method hopefully is much 17. ½RP − copy ≔ ½RP − revised
faster. This is achieved by using lazy constraints, using a technique 18. while true do
called solver callback (IBM 2017). 19. Solve ½RP − copy with SO-relaxation-callback
Many mixed-integer program solvers now offer solver callback 20. LB ≔ objective value of ½RP − copy
to modify the solving process. They allow the user to define a UB − LB
21. if LB ¼¼ none or ≤ ε then
solver callback function that solvers will call regularly during the UB
optimization process. When the solver reaches a new solution to a 22. break
problem, it gives the user a chance to add a lazy constraint(s) to the 23. end if
problem that makes the current solution infeasible. The solver call- 24. ½RP − copy ≔ ½RP − revised
back function allows us to provide the solver with a chance to cut 25. end while
off a nonoptimal NDS when the solver reaches a new solution in 26. return UB, ðxopt ; y opt Þ
each iteration. Thus, hopefully we can cut off multiple nonoptimal 27. end function
NDSs in each iteration, which should accelerate the solution pro-
cedure. We revised Wang et al. (2013)’s method as follows, using NDS Cutting Plane Method
the solver callback function. In Wang et al. (2013)’s method, one network strategy ðx ; y  Þ can
be cut off in each iteration by the following linear constraint
Framework of Improved SO Relaxation–Based Method
This method (Algorithm 1) searches the branch-and-cut tree of the X X X
linear relaxation problem of the RP and sometimes finds a solution ð1 − xa;m Þxa;m þ xa;m ð1 − xa;m Þ
a∈A2 m∈Ma m∈M a
to this problem. The callback function then is called and the sol-
X X 
ution is compared with the incumbent solution. If the newly gen- þ ð1 − ya;n Þya;n þ ya;n ð1 − ya;n Þ ≥ 2 ð41Þ
erated solution is better, update the incumbent solution and the n∈N a n∈N a
upper bound of the NDP. If not, cut off the generated solution using
the NDS cutting plane method (Algorithm 2). In addition, the re- which we refer to as a NDS cutting plane. When we try to solve
laxed problem is tightened using the dynamic outer-approximation the linear relaxation of the RP, we potentially can generate and add
(OA) cutting plane method (Algorithm 3). These added cutting a NDS cutting plane at each searched solution using the solver call-
planes help lift the lower bound LB of NDP. The method converges back function. When a NDS is searched, we easily can obtain the
to the globally optimal solution. The framework of the proposed system cost, SC, under this NDS by solving the UE flow and the BRP.
method is given as pseudo-code in Algorithm 1. If SC is less than the current upper bound, UB, then this NDS is better

© ASCE 04020122-6 J. Transp. Eng., Part A: Systems

J. Transp. Eng., Part A: Systems, 2020, 146(10): 04020122

 than all searched solutions, and we update the incumbent solution. Algorithm 3. Dynamic OA cutting plane method with solver
Otherwise, we cut it off using a generated NDS cutting plane. The callback
NDS cutting plane method is implemented as Algorithm 2. 1. Input: Solution ðx ; y  ; T ; v Þ, best bound ObjRP of ½RP −
copy
2. Set threshold values v^ a and v^ a;m;n , which satisfy
Algorithm 2. NDS cutting plane method with solver callback ObjRP × ðεSO =2Þ
3. a ð^
T SO va Þ ¼ P ; ∀ a ∈ A1
1. Input: Solution ðx ; y  ; T ; v Þ, best bound ObjRP of ½RP − jA1 j þ a∈A2 jN a jjM a j
copy, current UB, SC
ObjRP × ðεSO =2Þ
2. // Save incumbent solution or cut off non-optimal solution for 4. a ð^
T SO va;m;n Þ ¼ P ;∀ a ∈ A1 ;m ∈ M a ;
NDP jA1 j þ a∈A2 jN a jjM a j
3. if UB < SC then n ∈ Na
4. // Cut off non-optimal solution ðx ; y  Þ for NDP
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Universidad Militar Nueva Granada on 08/18/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

5. for a ∈ A1 do
5. Exclude strategy ðx ; y  Þ by adding lazy constraint to 
a ðva Þ − T̄ a
T SO εSO
SO
½RP − copy 6. if va > v^ a and > then
6. else
SO
T̄ a 2
 0  
7. // Save incumbent solution for NDP 7. add lazy constraint T̄ SO a ≥ ½ta ðva Þ þ ta ðva Þva ðva −
  
8. UB ≔ SC va Þ þ ta ðva Þva to ½RP − copy
9. ðxopt ; y opt Þ ≔ ðx ; y  Þ 8. end if
10. end if 9. end for
10. for a ∈ A2 do
11. for m ∈ Ma do
12. for n ∈ N a do
Dynamic OA Cutting Plane Method T SO ðv Þ− T̄ SOa;m;n ε
SO
13. if va;m;n > v^ a;m;n and a a;m;n >
Wang et al. (2013)’s method generates a set of linear constraints to SO
T̄ a;m;n 2
tighten the linear relaxation of the RP at each iteration. We refer to then
these as OA cutting planes. Our method considers generating OA 14. add lazy constraint
cutting planes at each searched solution to tighten the lower bound

of the initial problem, which can make use of the solver callback a;m;n ≥ ½ta;m;n ðva;m;n Þ
T̄ SO
function. The dynamic OA cutting plane method is implemented as 0
þ ta;m;n ðva;m;n Þva;m;n ðva;m;n
Algorithm 3.
− va;m;n Þ þ ta;m;n ðva;m;n Þva;m;n

to ½RP − copy
15. end if
16. end for
17. end for
18. end for

Numerical Tests

This section used the Sioux Falls network to illustrate the effective-
ness of the proposed model and solution method. This method uses
CPLEX version 12.8 to solve the linear relaxation of the RP with a
callback function. The relative optimality tolerance εSO was set at
0.001 for the dynamic OA method. The relative optimality toler-
ance ε for the bilevel programming also was set at 0.001. The tests
were performed on a PC with an Intel Core i5 CPU and 8G RAM.
Fig. 1 shows the network and new candidate links. Private car
demands and the data in the initial Sioux Falls network have the
same settings as those used by the Transportation Networks for Re-
search Core Team (2020), and we adjusted the unit of link data as
done by Luathep et al. (2011). We chose A2 ¼ fð13; 14Þ; ð14; 13Þ;
ð11; 15Þ; ð15; 11Þ; ð11; 9Þ; ð9; 11Þ; ð7; 16Þ; ð16; 7Þ; ð19; 22Þ; ð22; 19Þg
as the candidate link set. The value of time was set as $10/h. Freight
vehicle demands were set as 10% of private car demands. The
travel time function of links followed Bureau of Public Roads
(BPR) equation
ta ðva Þ ¼ t0a ½1 þ 0.15ðva =ca Þ4 

where t0a = free-flow time on link a; and ca = capacity of link a.

We assumed three road classifications: Types 1, 2, and 3. The
freight trucks were assumed to be fully laden two-axle HGVs, as
Fig. 1. Sioux Falls network.
in Moreno-Quintero et al. (2013). Based on the data in Martin and

© ASCE 04020122-7 J. Transp. Eng., Part A: Systems

J. Transp. Eng., Part A: Systems, 2020, 146(10): 04020122

 Table 1. SO relaxation–based and improved SO relaxation–based methods when three candidate links are chosen
SO relaxation–based method Improved SO relaxation–based method
Average time to Average time to
CPU Relative generate one CPU Relative NDS cutting generate one
Cases time (s) Iterations gap (%) NDS cut (s) time (s) Iterations gap (%) planes NDS cut (s)
Case 1 592.50 89 0.000 6.66 22.81 2 0.000 89 0.26
Case 2 662.27 92 0.000 7.20 16.34 3 0.000 86 0.19
Case 3 918.76 129 0.000 7.12 19.94 3 0.000 141 0.14
Case 4 490.54 71 0.000 6.91 15.36 2 0.000 71 0.22
Case 5 335.84 71 0.000 4.73 11.47 2 0.000 70 0.16
Case 6 386.11 89 0.000 4.34 8.53 2 0.000 94 0.09
Case 7 274.69 62 0.000 4.43 8.74 2 0.000 66 0.13
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Universidad Militar Nueva Granada on 08/18/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Case 8 275.29 89 0.000 3.09 10.07 3 0.000 88 0.11

Case 9 742.74 130 0.000 5.71 15.93 3 0.000 135 0.12
Case 10 567.16 115 0.087 4.93 13.88 2 0.000 121 0.11

can be constructed with capacities of 0 (not constructed), 10,000

Fig. 2. Algorithm efficiency comparison.
Thoresen (2015), the fixed road damage cost of these three road
classifications was set to $0.648=lane-km, $0.266=lane-km, and
$0.228=lane-km, respectively. The marginal road damage cost per
unit HGV on these three road classifications was set to $0.0218=km,
$0.636=km, and $1.52=km, respectively. The construction cost
of these three classifications was set to $1.5 million=lane-km,
$0.8 million=lane-km, and $0.3 million=lane-km. The free-flow
time of link a with the three classifications was set to t0a ; 1.2t0a ,
and 1.5t0a , where t0a is a constant with link a ∈ A, which was set
to the free-flow time in the Transportation Networks for Research
Core Team (2020) data set. In addition, we assumed that new links
(one lane), or 20,000 (two lanes), and that existing links were ran-
domly chosen to be one of the three classifications.
For the Sioux Falls network with 10 candidate links, if there was
no upper bound for the budget, we found that total investment of
the optimal NDS was $2.913 × 109 , with a system cost of $7.883 ×
105 when using the improved SO relaxation–based method. In this
case, Links (7, 16) and (16, 7) were not built. This phenomenon is a
kind of Braess’s paradox. The optimal NDS should not construct all
candidate links in the most advanced form with maximum lanes
and no budget constraint. Thus, we should try to solve the optimal
NDS and construct candidate links with proper road classifications
and lanes.
Next, we tested the efficiencies of the SO relaxation–based
method and the improved SO relaxation–based method over 10 in-
stances. In each instance, we randomly chose three links from link
set A2 as candidate links. The relative optimality tolerance was set
at ε ¼ 0.001. We also set the budget at $5 × 108 for each instance.
The computational results are reported in Table 1 and Fig. 2.
Obviously, the improved SO relaxation–based method outper-
forms the SO relaxation–based method of Wang et al. (2013). The
former saved 97.3% of the computational time of the latter. We
also found that the number of NDS cuts generated by the im-
proved SO relaxation–based method was similar to that generated
by the SO relaxation–based method. However, the average time
needed for the improved method to generate an NDS cut was
much smaller than that for the initial method.
We randomly chose five links from link set A2 as candidate links,
and kept the other settings of the preceding test. Computational time

Table 2. SO relaxation–based and improved SO relaxation–based methods when five candidate links are chosen
SO relaxation–based method Improved SO relaxation–based method
Average time to Average time to
CPU Relative generate one CPU Relative NDS cutting generate one
Cases time (s) Iterations gap (%) NDS cut (s) time (s) Iterations gap (%) planes NDS cut (s)
Case 1 >3,600 103 5.449 34.95 314.32 3 0.000 1386 0.23
Case 2 >3,600 228 2.382 15.79 99.36 3 0.000 473 0.21
Case 3 >3,600 259 3.498 13.90 136.09 2 0.000 858 0.16
Case 4 >3,600 169 3.493 21.30 193.43 3 0.000 1037 0.19
Case 5 >3,600 487 0.793 7.39 106.65 3 0.000 604 0.18
Case 6 >3,600 107 5.010 33.64 254.34 3 0.000 1352 0.19
Case 7 >3,600 333 2.735 10.81 51.63 2 0.000 679 0.08
Case 8 >3,600 185 2.598 19.46 69.47 3 0.000 642 0.11
Case 9 >3,600 220 2.454 16.36 74.47 3 0.000 592 0.13
Case 10 >3,600 180 3.666 20.00 84.14 2 0.000 679 0.12

© ASCE 04020122-8 J. Transp. Eng., Part A: Systems

J. Transp. Eng., Part A: Systems, 2020, 146(10): 04020122

 Table 3. Computational time under different budgets (s) government agencies may overestimate the network performance
Budget 0.5 × 109 1× 109 Infinity improvement made by road capacity expansion.
3. This paper considers private cars for passenger transportation
Case 1 314.32 539.07 618.90
and trucks for freight transportation. The proposed model frame-
Case 2 99.36 272.64 538.88
Case 3 136.09 393.88 604.66
work could be extended to address a more realistic transport net-
Case 4 193.43 375.22 698.39 work with multitype passenger travel means and multisize trucks,
Case 5 106.65 299.48 1297.28 especially in context of large-truck restriction regulation in urban
Case 6 254.34 474.00 723.22 areas (Wang et al. 2020).
Case 7 51.63 312.32 690.93 4. This paper proposes an improved SO relaxation–based method.
Case 8 69.47 273.80 531.41 Although it outperforms the SO relaxation–based method, we
Case 9 74.47 363.16 671.70 believe it can be improved further. Employing heuristic and meta-
Case 10 84.14 729.77 658.07 heuristic algorithms seems helpful for providing tight bounds for
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Universidad Militar Nueva Granada on 08/18/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

the DNDP, which may help accelerate the solution procedure.

was limited to 3,600 s for all cases. The computational results are
reported in Table 2.
We found that these cases cannot be solved by the SO relaxation–
based method in acceptable time. Furthermore, we found that the
improved SO relaxation–based method generated NDS cuts with
stable efficiency in solving larger scale problem, whereas the SO
relaxation–based method did not.
To explore the relation between budget and computational time,
we executed the improved SO relaxation–based method over the
10 preceding cases using different budgets. The CPU time to solve
each instance is listed in Table 3. The results show that the com-
putational time generally increased as the budget increases. We in-
fer that when the budget is larger, the number of candidate solutions
also is larger. A similar phenomenon was evident with Wang et al.
(2013)’s SO relaxation–based method.
Furthermore, parallel branch-and-bound can be a practical way
to improve our solution method.
5. Because existing automated vehicle (AV) technology develop-
ment and innovation indicate great potential for improving the
performance of urban transportation (Qu et al. 2017; Zhou et al.
2016, Ye and Wang 2018), we believe that AVs will be helpful
to urban freight transportation in the future. We suggest that
future studies consider network design with automated freight
trucks.
Data Availability Statement
Some or all data, models, or code generated or used during the
study are available from the corresponding author by request, in-
cluding the traffic network, origin-destination (OD) demand table,
link travel time, link volume, and road damage parameters.

Conclusions and Suggestions Acknowledgments

This paper proposes a bilevel network design model for urban
freight transportation networks to reduce the network’s system cost,
which consists of road damage cost and travel time cost. Whereas
the upper-level road planner chooses the optimal road classification
and capacity design to minimize the system cost, lower-level network
users make route choices in a UE manner. After that, we propose an
improved SO relaxation–based method that outperforms the existing
SO relaxation–based method in solving the bilevel model. Numerical
tests indicated the feasibility of our model and method. The main
findings are as follows:
1. The optimal NDS will not construct all candidate links as ad-
vanced types with maximum lanes without budget constraints.
Thus, they should be constructed with proper levels and lanes.
This instance of Braess’s paradox also urges development of an
efficient algorithm to solve the optimal NDS.
2. Link capacity design for candidate links can improve network
performance. However, choosing proper types for candidate
links can further improve the performance of the urban freight
transportation network.
Based on our proposed model and method, we make the follow-
ing suggestions:
1. This paper proposes a network design model that considers travel
time cost, road damage cost, and road classification design.
Future research can extend this idea in various freight network
environments (NDP for urban freight transportation with demand
uncertainty, NDP for link design and maintenance planning, and
so forth).
2. We suggest that government agencies consider not only road
capacity expansion, but also traffic components and road damage
caused by freight trucks. If road classification is not considered,
This study has been substantially supported by the National Natural
Science Foundation Council of China through projects (Grant
Nos. 71601142, 71531011, and 71890970/71890973), and a project
sponsored by the program of Shanghai Academic Research Leader.
Notation
The following symbols are used in this paper:
A = A1 ∪ A2 ;
A1 = set of existing links in freight transportation network;
A2 = set of new candidate links that can be constructed;
B = total construction budget;
cdam
a = damage cost per unit distance if freight vehicle travels
on link a ∈ A1 ;
cdam
a;m = Damage cost per unit distance if freight vehicle travels
on link a ∈ A2 when link is type m ∈ M a ;
cfixed
a = fixed cost per unit distance of link a ∈ A1 ;
a;m;n = fixed cost per unit distance of link a ∈ A2 when link a is
cfixed
level m with n lanes;
D = destination set in freight transportation network;
DFw = demands of freight trucks for OD pair w ∈ W;
DPw = demands of private cars for OD pair w ∈ W;
i− = fðk;iÞ ∈ A∶k ∈ Ng;
iþ = fði;kÞ ∈ A∶k ∈ Ng;
la = length of link a ∈ A;
M a = road classification set of candidate link a ∈ A2 ;
N = set of nodes in freight transportation network;
N a = set of numbers of lanes for candidate link a ∈ A2 ;

© ASCE 04020122-9 J. Transp. Eng., Part A: Systems

J. Transp. Eng., Part A: Systems, 2020, 146(10): 04020122

 O = origin set in freight transportation network;
ta ðva Þ = travel time function on link a ∈ A1 ;
ta;m;n ðva Þ = travel time function on link a ∈ A2 if link a is level m
with n lanes;
U = sufficiently large positive number;
v = ðva ;a ∈ AÞ;
va = vFa þvRa , aggregate flow on link a;
vFa = link flow of freight trucks on link a [passenger car
units (PCU)];
vPa = link flow of private cars on link a (PCU);
vFa;s = link flow of freight trucks on link a with destination s
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Universidad Militar Nueva Granada on 08/18/20. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
(PCU);
vPa;s = link flow of private cars on link a with destination s
(PCU);
x = ðxa;m ;a ∈ A1 ;m ∈ f1; :::;MgÞ;
xa;m = binary decision variable, where xa;m ¼ 1 if link a ∈ A2
is level m, and xa;m ¼ 0 otherwise;
y = ðya;n ;a ∈ A1 ;n ∈ f1; :::;NgÞ;
ya;n = binary decision variable, where ya;n ¼ 1 if and only if n
lanes are deployed on link a ∈ A2 , and ya;n ¼ 0
otherwise;
za;m;n = binary decision variable, where za;m;n ¼ 1 if and only if
link a is level m with n lanes, and za;m;n ¼ 0 otherwise;
α = value of time of network users; and
τ a;m;n = construction cost of link a ∈ A2 if link a is level m with
n lanes.
References
Bumpy Roads Ahead. 2018. America’s roughest rides and strategies to make
our roads smoother. Washington, DC: Road Information Program.
Dodoo, N. A., and N. Thorpe. 2005. “A new approach for allocating pave-
ment damage between heavy goods vehicles for road-user charging.”
Transp. Policy 12 (5): 419–430. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2005
.06.009.
Dou, X., H. Wang, and Q. Meng. 2019. “Parallel shuttle bus service design
for planned mass rapid transit shutdown: The Singapore experience.”
Transp. Res. Part C: Emerging Technol. 108: 340–356. https://doi
.org/10.1016/j.trc.2019.09.022.
Dueker, M. J., and A. M. Fischer. 2003. “Fixing Swiss potholes.” Econ. Lett.
79 (3): 409–415. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0165-1765(03)00031-4.
Farahani, R. Z., E. Miandoabchi, W. Y. Szeto, and H. Rashidi. 2013. “A
review of urban transportation network design problems.” Eur. J. Oper.
Res. 229 (2): 281–302. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2013.01.001.
Farvaresh, H., and M. M. Sepehri. 2013. “A branch and bound algorithm
for bi-level discrete network design problem.” Networks Spatial Econ.
13 (1): 67–106. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11067-012-9173-3.
He, J., W. Deng, Q. Hu, and Z. Liu. 2008. “Urban road grade proportion
based on trip mode.” J. Transp. Syst. Eng. Inf. Technol. 8 (5): 88–93.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S1570-6672(08)60042-2.
Highway Research Board. 1962. The AASHO road test, report 5, pavement
research. Highway Research Board Special Rep. 352. Washington, DC:
Highway Research Board.
IBM. 2017. IBM ILOG CPLEX Optimization Studio: CPLEX user’s
manual, version 12.7. New York: IBM.
Leblanc, L. J. 1975. “An algorithm for the discrete network design prob-
lem.” Transp. Sci. 9 (3): 183–199. https://doi.org/10.1287/trsc.9.3.183.
Liu, H., and D. Z. W. Wang. 2015. “Global optimization method for network
design problem with stochastic user equilibrium.” Transp. Res. Part B:
Methodol. 72: 20–39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trb.2014.10.009.
Long, J., Z. Gao, H. Zhang, and W. Y. Szeto. 2010. “A turning restriction
design problem in urban road networks.” Eur. J. Oper. Res. 206 (3):
569–578. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2010.03.013.
© ASCE 04020122-10
J. Transp. Eng., Part A: Systems, 2020, 146(10): 04020122
Luathep, P., A. Sumalee, W. H. K. Lam, Z.-C. Li, and H. K. Lo. 2011.
“Global optimization method for mixed transportation network design
problem: A mixed-integer linear programming approach.” Transp. Res.
Part B: Methodol. 45 (5): 808–827. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trb.2011
.02.002.
Martin, T. C., and T. R. Thoresen. 2015. “Estimation of the marginal cost of
road wear as a basis for charging freight vehicles.” Res. Transp. Econ.
49: 55–64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.retrec.2015.04.006.
Meng, Q., H. Yang, and M. G. H. Bell. 2001. “An equivalent continuously
differentiable model and a locally convergent algorithm for the continu-
ous network design problem.” Transp. Res. Part B: Methodol. 35 (1):
83–105. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0191-2615(00)00016-3.
Mitradjieva, M., and P. O. Lindberg. 2013. “The stiff is moving—Conjugate
direction Frank-Wolfe methods with applications to traffic assignment.”
Transp. Sci. 47 (2): 280–293. https://doi.org/10.1287/trsc.1120.0409.
Moreno-Quintero, E. 2006. “Optimal control of road freight flows by route
choice inducement: A case from Mexico.” Eur. J. Oper. Res. 175 (3):
1588–1604. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2005.02.027.
Moreno-Quintero, E., T. Fowkes, and D. Watling. 2013. “Modelling planner–
carrier interactions in road freight transport: Optimisation of road main-
tenance costs via overloading control.” Transp. Res. Part E: Logistics
Transp. Rev. 50: 68–83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tre.2012.11.001.
Qu, X., X. Li, M. Wang, and V. Dixit. 2017. “Advances in modelling con-
nected and automated vehicles.” J. Adv. Transp. 2017: 1–3. https://doi
.org/10.1155/2017/3268371.
Szeto, W. Y., X. Jaber, and M. O’Mahony. 2010. “Time-dependent discrete
network design frameworks considering land use.” Comput.-Aided Civ.
Infrastruct. Eng. 25 (6): 411–426. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8667
.2010.00654.x.
Transportation Networks for Research Core Team. 2020. “Transportation
networks for research.” Accessed April 2, 2020. https://github.com
/bstabler/TransportationNetworks.
Volovski, M., J. Murillo-Hoyos, T. U. Saeed, and S. Labi. 2017. “Estima-
tion of routine maintenance expenditures for highway pavement seg-
ments: Accounting for heterogeneity using random-effects models.”
J. Transp. Eng. Part A: Syst. 143 (5): 04017006. https://doi.org/10
.1061/JTEPBS.0000041.
Wang, D. Z. W., and H. K. Lo. 2010. “Global optimum of the linearized
network design problem with equilibrium flows.” Transp. Res. Part B:
Methodol. 44 (4): 482–492. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trb.2009.10.003.
Wang, G., Z. Gao, and M. Xu. 2019. “Integrating link-based discrete credit
charging scheme into discrete network design problem.” Eur. J. Oper.
Res. 272 (1): 176–187. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2018.05.069.
Wang, H., W. H. K. Lam, X. Zhang, and H. Shao. 2015. “Sustainable trans-
portation network design with stochastic demands and chance con-
straints.” Int. J. Sustainable Transp. 9 (2): 126–144. https://doi.org/10
.1080/15568318.2012.740147.
Wang, H., Q. Meng, and X. Zhang. 2020. “Multiple equilibrium behaviors
of auto travellers and a freight carrier under the cordon-based large-
truck restriction regulation.” Transp. Res. Part E: Logistics Transp.
Rev. 134 (Feb): 101829. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tre.2019.101829.
Wang, H., G.-Y. Xiao, L.-Y. Zhang, and Y. Ji. 2014. “Transportation net-
work design considering morning and evening peak-hour demands.”
Math. Prob. Eng. 2014: 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/806916.
Wang, H., and X. Zhang. 2017. “Game theoretical transportation network
design among multiple regions.” Ann. Oper. Res. 249 (1–2): 97–117.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-014-1700-9.
Wang, S., Q. Meng, and H. Yang. 2013. “Global optimization methods for
the discrete network design problem.” Transp. Res. Part B: Methodol.
50: 42–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trb.2013.01.006.
Ye, Y., and H. Wang. 2018. “Optimal design of transportation networks
with automated vehicle links and congestion pricing.” J. Adv. Transp.
2018: 1. https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/3435720.
Zhou, M., X. Qu, and S. Jin. 2016. “On the impact of cooperative autono-
mous vehicles in improving freeway merging: A modified intelligent
driver model-based approach.” IEEE Trans. Intell. Transp. Syst. 18 (6):
1–7. https://doi.org/10.1109/TITS.2016.2606492.
J. Transp. Eng., Part A: Systems