JOURNAL OF ADVANCED TRANSPORTATION

J. Adv. Transp. 2015; 49:385–401

Published online 17 June 2014 in Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com). DOI: 10.1002/atr.1278

Optimization of headways with stop-skipping control: a case study

of bus rapid transit system

Xumei Chen1*, Bruce Hellinga2, Chengzhi Chang3 and Liping Fu2

1
MOE Key Laboratory for Transportation Complex Systems Theory and Technology, Center of Cooperative Innovation
for Beijing Metropolitan Transportation, Beijing Jiaotong University, Beijing 100044, China
2
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Waterloo, 200 University Avenue West, Waterloo,
Ontario N2L 3G1, Canada
3
MOE Key Laboratory for Transportation Complex Systems Theory and Technology, School of Traffic and
Transportation, Beijing Jiaotong University, Beijing 100044, China

SUMMARY
Bus rapid transit system is designed to provide high-quality and cost-efficient passenger transportation ser-
vices. In order to achieve this design objective, effective scheduling strategies are required. This research
aims at improving the operation efficiency and service quality of a BRT system through integrated optimi-
zation of its service headways and stop-skipping strategy. Based on cost analysis for both passengers and
operation agencies, an optimization model is established. A genetic algorithms based algorithm and an
application-oriented solution method are developed. Beijing BRT Line 2 has been chosen as a case study,
and the effectiveness of the optimal headways with stop-skipping services under different demand levels
has been analyzed. The results has shown that, at a certain demand level, the proposed operating strategy
can be most advantageous for passengers with an accepted increase of operating costs, under which the
optimum headway is between 3.5 and 5.5 min for stop-skipping services during the morning peak hour
depending on the demand with the provision of stop-skipping services. The effectiveness of the optimal
headways with stop-skipping services is compared with those of existing headways and optimal headways
without stop-skipping services. The results show that operating strategies under the optimal headways with
stop-skipping services outperforms the other two operating strategies with respect to total costs and in-
vehicle time for passengers. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

KEY WORDS: bus rapid transit; stop-skipping; optimization; cost; headway

1. INTRODUCTION

Bus rapid transit (BRT) is an innovative, high capacity, and cost-effective public transit solution that is
designed to significantly improve urban mobility. More and more BRT systems have been imple-
mented and put into operations in recent years. In China, BRT is being widely adopted as a strategy
to alleviate the increasingly deteriorating traffic conditions. After several years of BRT operating
experiences in different cities in China, there appears to be a growing consensus that the success of
the BRT systems relies more on system operation than on system construction. In particular, the issue
of how to efficiently operate the BRT system under reasonable headways has become a major concern.
In China, BRT operation control strategies were generally developed manually based on local expe-
rience and knowledge of the BRT operation agencies. Thus, it is usually a time-consuming process to
design BRT operation strategies and passenger needs cannot be properly met. Moreover, when a new
service is added, cost and effectiveness cannot be quantified easily. In some circumstances, extended
waiting time for the passenger whose stop is skipped can be a particular deterrent. This research

*Correspondence to: Xumei Chen, MOE Key Laboratory for Transportation Complex Systems Theory and Technology,
Center of Cooperative Innovation for Beijing Metropolitan Transportation, Beijing Jiaotong University, Beijing 100044,
China. E-mail: xmchen@bjtu.edu.cn

Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

386 X. CHEN ET AL.

focuses on improving the operational efficiency and service quality of a BRT by optimizing its service
headway along with stop-skipping service. The objective of this research is to provide optimized headways
for operating agencies based on the given passenger origin-destination (O-D) demand matrixes. Due to the
fact that there exists strong pressure to improve transit service levels during peak periods in most cities of
China, the focus of this paper is to design headways of BRT line during peak commuting periods.
This paper first reviews the existing studies on the bus/BRT headway optimization. Subsequently, a
new model for optimizing headway of BRT with added stop-skipping service is presented, which con-
siders both operating costs and passenger needs. The method of genetic algorithms (GA) and an appli-
cation-oriented solution method are employed to solve the optimization problem. The model and
solution method are then applied in a case study with Beijing BRT Line 2. The effectiveness of the
optimal headways with stop-skipping services is compared with those of existing headways and opti-
mal headways without stop-skipping services. Finally, the paper presents concluding remarks of the
study. The strategies for improving BRT operational efficiency and service level are suggested.

2. EXISTING STUDIES

Headway/frequency optimization of bus/BRT has been studied extensively in recent years. A complete
operation planning process includes network design, setting frequencies, timetable development, bus
scheduling, and driver scheduling. Setting frequencies is one of the critical determinants of system per-
formance that needs to receive the same degree of effort towards improving practice as do the other
scheduling elements [1]. This is a problem on how to provide the proposed service at a minimum cost
and it is one of the most important issues for operation scheduling.
Furth and Wilson [2] was among the early researchers in 1980s to propose models for setting
frequencies. Their model allocated the available buses between time periods and between routes so
as to maximize net social benefit subject to constraints on total subsidy, fleet size, and levels of vehicle
loading. An algorithm was developed to solve headways that reduced passenger wait time and
increased ridership. The proposed model was applied to a case study, and the results showed that
the model can readily be applied to evaluate the impacts of an alternative vehicle capacity and to
investigate the value of changing service policies.
Cedar [3] presented four different methods to derive the bus frequency: two are based on maximum
load data and two propose the use of load profile data. Alternative timetables were also investigated in
conjunction with minimizing the required bus runs and number of buses for a single route. The derived
headways were analyzed within an acceptable range while considering the possible changes incurred
to the fleet size. The integration between resource saving and frequency determination procedures
allows the scheduler’s performance to be improved.
In 1990s, Oudheusden and Zhu [4] studied frequency scheduling taking into account the present
practices, limited bus fleet size, parking spaces, the fluctuating traffic conditions throughout the day,
and the special feature that buses and crews were not pre-assigned to specific trips by the beginning
of the daily operation. An integer programming model was developed and two heuristic methods were
presented. The number of trips to be scheduled was constrained to limit the passengers’ waiting time
no longer than a certain value. The resulting methodology was tested on two bus routes in Bangkok. It
appeared that schedules can be designed which simultaneously reduce exploitation costs and improve
service to the public.
Delle Site and Filippi [5] developed an optimization model, in which the short turning strategy was
applied on a multi-period basis with elastic and inelastic demand. In the case of elastic demand, the
objective is to maximize the social benefit, whereas in the case of inelastic demand, the sum of user
and operator costs is to be minimized. Passenger and bus arrival were assumed to estimate waiting
time. Under different conditions, the waiting time is estimated for different group of passengers. A
numerical procedure to solve the problem was provided. An application that compares the strategy
with a base situation showed that the strategy turns out to be beneficial only with demand patterns that
exhibit pronounced peaks.
After 2000, Fu et al. [6] presented a new transit operating strategy in which service vehicles operate
in pairs with the lead vehicle providing an all-stop local service and the following vehicle being
allowed to skip some stops as an express service. The underlying problem was formulated as a

Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. J. Adv. Transp. 2015; 49:385–401
DOI: 10.1002/atr
 OPTIMIZATION FOR BRT WITH STOP-SKIPPING CONTROL 387

nonlinear integer programming problem with the objective of minimizing the total costs for both op-
erators and passengers. It was assumed that an average passenger waiting time equals to half the head-
way in the passenger cost analysis if the passenger can catch the bus. Nonlinear optimization
techniques based on an exhaustive search method were used to solve this problem. A real-life example
was used to identify the conditions under which the proposed operating strategy is most advantageous.
Bai et al. [7] proposed a model to obtain the optimal headway for BRT based on maximum eco-
nomic benefits of operation. Passenger waiting time was expressed in a calculus format and used as
a constraint. Tabu search-based algorithm is designed to solve this model. The results from a real-life
case study showed that the application of Tabu search-based algorithm to BRT scheduling optimiza-
tion is of great value.
Sun et al. [8] studied the headway optimization and scheduling combination of BRT vehicles. A
model has been established to minimize passengers’ travel costs and vehicles’ operation costs. The
waiting time was calculated by the half of headway if the passenger can catch the BRT vehicle. The
scheduling combination was composed of normal, zone, and express scheduling. The model was
solved using GA. The result of the numerical case study showed that the optimization results can save
69.9% of costs.
Zhao and Zeng [9] optimized headways using their methodology on minimizing transfers and total
user cost while maximizing service coverage. The average waiting time to board a vehicle was one-
half of the headway. A stochastic global search scheme based on a combined GA and simulated
annealing search method was developed. The methodology was tested with published benchmark
problems and applied to a large-scale realistic network optimization problem. The results showed that
the methodology is capable of producing improved solutions to large-scale transit network design
problems.
Kim et al. [10] developed an optimal bus frequency model by considering bus operating costs to the
service supplier and passenger demand. The average waiting times at bus stops was estimated using
the mean and the variance of bus headway. Optimal bus frequency was determined by applying the
demand-and-travel time-responsive (DTR) or the demand-and-travel time-responsive model for critical
scheduling areas model. A model verification process was implemented by using data collected from a
bus system in Seoul. The reliability and uncertainty of the optimal solution was evaluated with a
sensitivity analysis.
Yu et al. [11] presented a bi-level programming model, which determines the optimal bus frequen-
cies aiming to minimize the total travel time of passengers subject to the constraint on the overall fleet
size of each company. For short-headway lines, the average waiting time of each passenger is the half
of the headway. An iterative approach, which consists of a GA and a label-marking method, was used
to solve the model. Finally, the model was applied to two test examples. The results showed that the
optimization can improve the local service level of one company, and the proper integration of several
companies probably improved the efficiency of resources and the service level of the whole transit
system.
Hadas et al. [12] constructed an optimization framework based on the costs associated with running
empty-seats and passenger overload, considering stochastic demand and bus travel time. The objective
function was to minimize the total cost incurred with decision variables of either frequency or vehicle
capacity. The performance and benefits of the models were evaluated with a simple example. The re-
sults show that both the ratio between the costs and the variability of demand and travel time affect the
optimal headway.
Recently, Cortés et al. [13] and Tirachini et al. [14] developed a short turning model and a model
that combines short turning and deadheading for a single bus line considering both operators’ and
users’ costs. They assumed that passengers arrive at stations uniformly at a fixed rate, which is a rea-
sonable assumption in cases of high frequency services. Buses are assumed to arrive either Poisson or
regularly spaced; the average waiting time at each station is equal to the entire headway in the former
case and to half of the headway in the second. An analytical expression for the optimal frequency was
derived. Applications on actual transit corridors showed different benefits of the added operating strat-
egies for different demand configurations.
Dell’Olio et al. [15] proposed an optimization model for setting frequencies and sizing the buses on
each route in the bus system. The proposed model was a bi-level optimization model with constraints

Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. J. Adv. Transp. 2015; 49:385–401
DOI: 10.1002/atr
388 X. CHEN ET AL.

on bus capacity. When passengers whose origin and destination are connected without transfer by the
full-length line only, in the case of random bus arrivals and under the assumption that passengers can
always board the first available bus, the average waiting time in operation period is given by headway.
In case of regular bus arrivals, the average waiting time in operation period is given by half of head-
way. A four-step algorithm was developed to solve the optimization problem. By graphically
representing the results of the model applied to a real case, a series of useful conclusions were reached
for the management and planning of a fleet of transit vehicles.
The review of the literature reveals that determining the optimal headway belongs to one of the most
important problems in public transport, and many researchers have directly or indirectly applied GA in
optimizing frequencies of bus routes. In practice, stop-skipping control is one of the operating strate-
gies to better match services covered by a transit route with the O-D demand distribution along the
route. The basic idea behind this control strategy is to allow some vehicles skip certain low-demand
stops, thus increasing the operating speed of the route. However, most of the studies reviewed primar-
ily focused on bus systems without stop-skipping control or bus systems with short-turn or
deadheading strategies. It appears that headway/frequency optimization with added stop-skipping ser-
vices for a BRT system has been scarce. Suitable and applicable BRT stop-skipping strategies based
on BRT operating characteristics should be designed. The work described in this paper expands upon
previous research on headway optimization by incorporating BRT operating characteristics and eval-
uating the effectiveness of optimized headways for a BRT system when stop-skipping services are
added. In addition, as clearly seen from the literature review, most researchers used waiting time as
part of their objective function for optimizing headway because it has the biggest impact on transit util-
ity. Waiting time depends on passenger and bus arrival patterns. The average passenger waiting time at
a bus station is equal to half of the bus headway if buses arrive at the station at a fixed headway, and
passengers arrive randomly with a uniform distribution. In this research, passengers are assumed to ar-
rive randomly, according to a uniform distribution, regardless of the arrival time of the BRT vehicles.
This assumption is suitable for high-frequency BRT corridors in Beijing. The headway of BRT in
Beijing is no more than 10 min all day long. Meanwhile, BRT vehicles are assumed to arrive regularly
in each operation period (There are four half-an-hour operation periods during morning peak hour in
the case study.), so the average waiting time at each station is equal to half of the headway under
uncongested condition. While considering insufficient capacity issues under congested condition, the
average waiting time for passengers who can board the BRT vehicle is equal to half of the headway.
For a passenger who cannot board the BRT vehicle, they need to wait for one more headway for the
next arriving bus.

3. PROPOSED OPTIMIZATION MODEL

The optimal headway for a BRT system depends on several factors, including the overall operating
cost for the BRT company, the waiting time and in-vehicle time of the passengers and their value of
time, the length of the BRT line, and the fleet size. Stop-skipping control could be implemented in
two ways, namely, preset and dynamic. In a preset implementation, the stop-skipping plan is designed
in advance, specifying the stations to be skipped and the time period over which the operations take
effect. In contrast, a dynamic stop-skipping control determines the skipping schedule in real time based
on the operation conditions. This research focuses on the preset stop-skipping control because that it
reflects the kind of stop-skipping services that could be implemented in Beijing. Adding a stop-
skipping control almost always results in a trade-off among the extra waiting time of passengers whose
stations have been skipped, the reduction of in-vehicle time of passengers, and the change in operating
cost. In this research, a deterministic approach for the all stop/stop-skipping service selection is used.
This is because it is assumed that the saved in-vehicle time is more than the extra waiting time if the
passengers choose stop-skipping services, considering the current practice of bus operations in Beijing.
Under the conditions that an all stop bus arrives at the stop earlier than the next stop-skipping bus, the
extra waiting time is time difference between arrival time of the next stop-skipping bus and the all stop
bus. The optimal headway for a BRT system can be determined through a mathematical optimization.
The following section describes the proposed model and presents an application-oriented solution
method that can be used to find the optimal BRT headway when stop-skipping services are added.

Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. J. Adv. Transp. 2015; 49:385–401
DOI: 10.1002/atr
 OPTIMIZATION FOR BRT WITH STOP-SKIPPING CONTROL 389

3.1. Generalized cost

The problem of setting frequencies/headways is to find the trade-off between passenger’s needs and
economic benefits of BRT operation companies. In this paper, generalized cost is defined as the com-
bination of passenger waiting and in-vehicle time and vehicle operating costs. The objective is to find a
solution that minimizes this generalized cost for a single BRT route with stop-skipping trips and given
demand. Service time is divided into periods of constant demand and within each time interval, BRT
vehicles are dispatched from a terminal with a consistent headway.
The total cost of passenger trip time is calculated as in the following Equation (1):

C p ¼ C w þ C v ¼ T w U w þ T v U v (1)

where
Cp = total cost of passenger trip time for the BRT line
Cw, Cv = cost of waiting time at BRT stations and BRT in-vehicle time
Tw, Tv = waiting time at BRT stations and BRT in-vehicle time, and
Uw, Uv = unit time value for waiting time at BRT stations and BRT in-vehicle time.
It should be noted that walking time to stations is mainly decided by station location. Because
the operational scheduling cannot impact walking time, walking time to stations is not considered in
Equation (1). Cw can be further expressed as in Equation (2) as follows:
X  X 
C w ¼ T w U w ¼ U w  qaij t a;w s s;w
ij þ qij t ij ¼ Uw qaij ha =2 þ qsij hs =2 (2)
i; j∈A i;j∈A

Where
a, s = all-stop services and stop-skipping services respectively
A = the set of all BRT stations
qaij , qsij = O-D trips from Station i to Station j for all-stop services and stop-skipping services for
an operation period
t a;w s;w
ij , t ij = BRT waiting time from Station i to Station j for all-stop services and stop-skipping
services, and
ha, hs = headways for all-stop services and stop-skipping services.
Here, it is assumed that waiting time is equal to half of the headway under uncongested conditions and
one more headway is added under congested conditions, which can be expressed in Equations (3) and (4):

ha =2; Under the uncongested conditons:
t a;w
ij ¼ (3)
h =2 þ h ¼ 3h =2;
a a a
Under the congested conditons:


hs =2; Under the uncongested conditons:
t s;w
ij ¼ (4)
h =2 þ h ¼ 3h =2;
s s s
Under the congested conditons:

In this paper, ‘uncongested conditions’ is defined as the load factor is less than 1.2 and ‘congested
conditions’ is defined as the load factor is greater than or equal to 1.2.
Cv can be further expressed as in Equation (5) as follows:
X 
C v ¼ T v U v ¼ U v  qaij t a;v s s;v
ij þ qij t ij (5)
i; j∈A

Where
t a;v s;v
ij , t ij = BRT in-vehicle time from Station i to Station j for all-stop services and stop-skipping services.

Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. J. Adv. Transp. 2015; 49:385–401
DOI: 10.1002/atr
390 X. CHEN ET AL.

Bus rapid transit in-vehicle time from Station i to Station j can be calculated from Equations (6) and (7):

t a;v a;t
ij ¼ t ij þ t ij
a;sd
þ t a;id
ij
X
j
 
¼ Laij =V aij þ max qbm τ b ; qam τ a ha =3600 þ N aij d=3600 þ N ′ij ðC  gÞ2 =7200C (6)
m¼i

where
t a;t a;sd a;id
ij , t ij , and t ij = travel time, delay at stations, and intersection delay from Station i to Station j
for all-stop services
Laij = distance along line from Station i to Station j for all-stop services
V aij = average speed from Station i to Station j for all-stop services
qbm , qam = boardings and alightings rate at Station m
τ b, τ a = passenger boarding and alighting time
N aij = number of BRT stations between Station i and Station j for all-stop services
d = acceleration-deceleration delay at stations
N ′ij = number of signalized intersections on line between Station i and Station j
C = average traffic signal cycle length, and
g = average green interval duration for phase(s) in which BRT vehicles discharge.

t s;v s;t s;sd

ij ¼ t ij þ t ij þ t ij
s;id

X
j
 
¼ Lsij =V sij þ max qbm τ b ; qam τ a hs =3600 þ N sij d=3600 þ N ′ij ðC  gÞ2 =7200C (7)
m¼i

Where
t s;t s;sd s;id
ij , t ij , and t ij = travel time, delay at stations, and intersection delay from Station i to Station j
for stop-skipping services
Lsij = distance along line from Station i to Station j for stop-skipping services
V sij = average speed from Station i to Station j for stop-skipping services
N sij = number of BRT stations between Station i and Station j for stop-skipping services.
The operational costs for BRT systems are divided into fixed and variable costs. Fixed costs, including
infrastructure investment costs (such as BRT stations investment costs), rents, and office furniture/equip-
ments, are not changed by the addition of stop-skipping service. We assumed administrative wages in the
fixed cost are not impacted by the stop-skipping services and therefore can be omitted in the optimization
model. BRT crew wages in the fixed costs will vary with stop-skipping services. Variable costs include
BRT vehicle maintenance cost, BRT vehicle depreciation cost, fuel cost, and tire cost. All of these costs
are directly related to operating kilometers and operating hours. Here, we introduce BRT vehicle depre-
ciation rates and unit cost value per kilometer that covers BRT crew wages, BRT vehicle maintenance
cost, fuel cost, and tire cost. Then, the BRT operating costs can be expressed as Equation (8):

C o ¼ LU o ðT o =ha þ T o =hs Þ þ r a ðQa T o =ca Þ þ r s ðQs T o =cs Þ (8)

where
Co = the operational costs for the BRT line
L = length of BRT line
Uo = unit cost value per kilometer for a BRT vehicle
To = operating hours
ra, rs = BRT vehicle depreciation rates for all-stop services and added stop-skipping services
Qa, Qs = maximum number of passengers between stations for all-stop services and added stop-skipping
services, and
ca, cs = rated passenger capacity for all-stop services and stop-skipping services.

Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. J. Adv. Transp. 2015; 49:385–401
DOI: 10.1002/atr
 OPTIMIZATION FOR BRT WITH STOP-SKIPPING CONTROL 391

3.2. Optimization model

Bus rapid transit is an enhanced bus system that operates on bus lanes or other transit ways in order to
combine the flexibility of buses with the high capacity of rail transits [16]. Generally, BRT is equipped
with advanced transit facilities and equipment, such as GPS, smart fare payment systems, and therefore
passenger volumes and bus operating conditions can be collected automatically. Specific station plat-
form designs are typically used to make the BRT system operate more efficiently. More reliable transit
service can be provided by using exclusive bus lanes or busways. In addition to these physical charac-
teristics, BRT can support a variety of operating services at the same time including express, local, and
stop-skipping services, which are difficult and expensive to implement in a rail environment [17].
Stop-skipping service is adopted in many existing BRT systems, such as TransMilenio in Bogotá
and the BRT in the Pittsburgh region. The wide variation in the characteristics of different BRT sys-
tems poses a challenge to formulate a practical and applicable model with efficient solution procedures
for networks of every size.
The objective is to minimize the operational cost and the passenger cost within the available re-
sources when skip-stop services are provided. The decision variables are headway for all-stop/stop-
skipping services and binary variables representing whether or not stations are skipped. O-D demand
and fleet are given. The O-D in this paper is defined as station origin and station destination. The O-D
is derived from the smart card system that cannott include the information on passenger’s trip before
they arrive at the station. Therefore, a deterministic approach for passengers’ station selection is used
in this research considering this deterministic approach is easy to be applied in the practice. A single
pattern of stop skipping is considered. This section describes the BRT headway optimization model
according to the generalized cost analysis. For simplification, it is assumed that (1) passengers are
willing to use stop-skipping services because of time saving and will not transfer between all-stop
services and stop-skipping services due to transfer costs. In this paper, all stop and stop-skipping
services are operated independently, reflecting the current practice of bus operations in Beijing. The
vehicle in stop-skipping services is not necessary to follow the one with a preset headway in all stop
services. This means the passenger will not transfer between stop-skipping services and all stop services.
Also, because the BRT headway is short in Beijing (no more than 10 min), passengers are generally
unwilling to take the express bus and walk one/two stations or walk from a station that only all-stop
service is provided to an express station and take stop-skipping service to his/her destination. The average
walking speed for passengers is about 6 km/h and the average station distance of BRT is about 1.2 km.
Walking one or two stations will take more than 10 min. So the passengers generally prefer to wait at
stations rather than take express bus and walk one/two stations or walk one or two stations and take
express bus. Accordingly, passenger trip choice can be based on a reasonable simplification; (2) the
number of drivers or conductors in the BRT crew will change with an adjustment in the number of
BRT vehicles when stop-skipping services are added, but the number of administrative staff is assumed
to remain constant; (3) passengers randomly arrive at BRT stations according to a uniform distribution,
where there are punctual arrivals of BRT vehicles and BRT vehicles are assumed to arrive regularly
spaced in each operation period. Therefore, their waiting time is computed as the service headway divided
by 2 under uncongested conditions and one more headway is added under congested conditions.
According to the first assumption aforementioned, due to the fact that passengers tend to choose the
quickest and most convenient route, stop-skipping service is the first choice for passengers if their
needs can be met with stop-skipping services. Therefore, the calculation of qaij and qsij can be simplified
as follows:
Binary variables representing whether or not a station is skipped by the stop-skipping service are
introduced to the model as follows:


0; The BRT vehicle skips the Station i in the stop-skipping services:
xsi ¼ (9)
1; The BRT vehicle stops at the Station i in the stop-skipping services:

Suppose A represents
 the set of all BRT stations and As the subset of BRT stations for the stop-skipping
services, As ¼ xs1 ; xs2 ; xs3 ; …; xsi ; …; xsN . Here, N is the number of BRT stations. From i to j, if xsi ¼ 1 and

Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. J. Adv. Transp. 2015; 49:385–401
DOI: 10.1002/atr
392 X. CHEN ET AL.

xsj ¼ 1, then qsij ¼ qij and qaij ¼ 0; otherwise, qaij ¼ qij and qkij ¼ 0.Here, qij is the given OD trips from
Station i to Station j and qij ¼ qaij þ qsij .
Then the objective function is formulated as:

8 X 
>
> qaij ha þ qsij hs =2 Under the uncongested
>
< i; j∈A conditons
minC t ¼ C p þ C o ¼ U w  X h   ′ i
>
> s′ s
>
: qa a
ij h þ qs s
ij h þ 3 qa a
ij h þ q ij h =2
Under the congested
i; j∈A conditons
" #
X X
j
  (10)
þU v  qaij  Laij =V aij þ max qbm τ b ; qam τ a ha =3600 þ N aij d=3600 þ N ′ij ðC  gÞ2 =7200C
i; j∈A m¼i
" #
X X
j
 
þU v  qsij  Lsij =V sij þ max qbm τ b ; qam τ hs =3600 þ N sij d=3600 þ N ′ij ðC  gÞ =7200C
a 2

i; j∈A m¼i

þLU o ðT o =ha þ T o =hs Þ þ r a ðQa T o =ca Þ þ rs ðQs T o =cs Þ

8
> LF min ≤ ha Qa =T o ca ≤ LF max
>
>
> LF ≤ hs Qs =T cs ≤ LF
>
>
< min o max
a′
s:t: T o =N ≤ h a
>
>
> T =N s′ ≤ hs
>
>
> o
:
As ∈ A

Where
Ct = total costs
′ ′
qaij , qsij = the left O-D trips from Station i to Station j for all-stop services and stop-skipping services for
an operation period, which will be completed by the next vehicle under congested conditions
LFmin = the minimum load factor that can be accepted and a value of 50% is recommended in Beijing
LFmax = the maximum load factor that can be accepted and a value of 120% is recommended in Beijing
′
Na = existing number of BRT vehicles that can be used for the all-stop services
′
Ns = existing number of BRT vehicles that can be used for the stop-skipping services
A = set of all BRT stations, and
As = subset of station in the stop-skipping services.
It should be noted that the first two constraints in the optimization model address passenger capacity
elements considering load factors for the all stop services and stop-skipping services, the second two
constraints consider BRT vehicle availability and headway limitations, and the last one is to constrain
As as the subset of BRT stations for the stop-skipping services.

3.3. Solution method

Headway optimization is a nonlinear programming problem. The complexity of the problem quickly
increases as the number of stops, lines, and the types of services increases. The algorithm complexity
for the proposed model is exponential, which is O(L*2(N-2)). Here, N is the number of stops on the line
and L is the number of routes. If L = 1 and N = 10, the algorithm complexity for the model is O(256).
When L increases to 2 and N increases to 20, the algorithm complexity for the model will increase to O
(524,288). Given the nature of the problem and the future need to extend to large-scale networks, it is
decided to develop a GA for optimally solving the problem. Although there are only four sets of stop-
skipping stations in the case study, there is great possibility that the optimization model is applied to
BRT routes with more feasible sets of stop-skipping stations or large scale BRT network in the future.
Therefore, the GA-based algorithm is developed in this study. GA is ideal for this problem, mainly

Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. J. Adv. Transp. 2015; 49:385–401
DOI: 10.1002/atr
 OPTIMIZATION FOR BRT WITH STOP-SKIPPING CONTROL 393

because it (1) naturally handles binary variables with encoding, thereby taking care of decision vari-
ables of stop status, which constitute the majority of the decision variables in headway optimization
problem; and (2) allows procedure-based declarations, thereby allowing complex algorithmic
approaches (involving if then-else conditions) to be handled easily [18]. A GA is a search heuristic that
mimics the process of natural selection. It consists of the following main components: chromosomal
representation, initial population, fitness evaluation, selection, crossover, and mutation. In this paper,
chromosomes are headways for all-stop and stop-skipping services. After the chromosomal represen-
tation has been decided, an initial population, which is called the first generation, is created randomly
to serve as the starting point for the GA. Subsequently, the fitness of every chromosome in the popu-
lation is defined; the fitness is the value of the objective function in the headway optimization problem
being solved. After that, the selection, crossover, and mutation processes are executed to form a new
generation. This is an iterative process to search the optimal headway until the stopping criterion is
reached. The results of the model show the optimal headways for all-stop and stop-skipping services
to minimize the objective function on user and passenger costs. MATLAB toolbox [19] is used to de-
velop the GA for headway optimization. Several key parameters are determined. They are a population
size of 20, a probability of performing crossover of 0.9, and a probability of mutation of 0.07. More-
over, a maximum number of generations is given as 200. The stopping criterion is designed to occur
when either 10 consecutive generations have the same total costs, or the difference between total costs
from two consecutive runs becomes less than or equal to 1% (not including two consecutive genera-
tions with the same total costs), or when the GA repeated the maximum number of generations.
Furthermore, an application-oriented solution method is proposed in order to reduce the ineffective
computation. The application-oriented solution method means the feasibility of stop sets for stop-
skipping services should be evaluated before the optimization of headway and the unfeasible sets
should be screened off. Not all stop sets can be implemented in the practices considering passenger
demand characteristics, stop location, and other factors. For the stop-skipping services, the design of
their stop sets should consider the operational practices. Although there are 2(N-2) stop sets for stop-
skipping services from a mathematical perspective, it is possible that there are only several stop sets
can be used in the operational practices. Inefficient computation for the infeasible stop sets not only
wastes computational resources, but also brings system overload. Therefore, such ineffective compu-
tation should be avoided. Accordingly, before GA algorithm is executed, a step of designing the stop
sets for the stop-skipping services based on passenger demand characteristics, stop location, stop func-
tion, and regulation on designing stop-skipping services should be added.

4. CASE STUDY, RESULTS, AND ANALYSIS

4.1. A real case study of BRT Line 2 in Beijing

For real-world application, the BRT Line 2 in Beijing is studied in this research. All stations of BRT
Line 2 are shown in Figure 1. The 16 km-long Chaoyang BRT Line 2 runs in the east corridor of
Beijing, which traverses through four ring roads. From Chaoyangmen Station to Yangzha Station
(via the midstation of Shilipu), it includes 22 signalized intersections and 33 BRT stations in two
directions. Almost all BRT stations are located near signalized intersections. BRT vehicles operating
on Chaoyang BRT Line 2 run from 5:00 AM to 11:00 PM, with the headway of 3–4 min at the peak hour
and 8–10 min at off-peak hour. Ninety BRT vehicles were purchased for BRT Line 2. Stations feature
level boarding and alighting and off-board fare collection. The dwell time at stations is within a range
from 11 to 16 s.
Stop-skipping allows BRT vehicles to run as an express service on the same line. By analyzing the
characteristics of passenger boarding and alighting, stop-skipping services are considered for inclusion
within the operations plan for BRT Line 2 in Beijing. The exclusive bus lane on Line 2 is located ad-
jacent to the leftmost lane of the roadway, but this lane is not physically separated from the adjacent
lanes (only pavement markings are used to delineate the exclusive bus lane) and therefore it is feasible
for BRT vehicles to pass each other. This is an essential requirement for stop-skipping services. Data
on passenger boarding and alighting was obtained from the smart card fare payment system. The morn-
ing peak period off-line data is used. Passenger demand profile and load profile is as shown in Figure 2.

Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. J. Adv. Transp. 2015; 49:385–401
DOI: 10.1002/atr
394 X. CHEN ET AL.

Figure 1. Bus rapid transit line 2 in Beijing.

The load factors are analyzed to evaluate whether the congested conditions appear under four different
demand levels (up to 4 × base demand) due to insufficient capacity. That is to say, there are passengers
who cannot board the BRT vehicle and need to wait for one more headway for next vehicle. It is found
that all load factors is less than 120% even under 4 × base demand level. Hence, all passenger can catch
the BRT vehicle and their waiting time is headway divided by 2 in this case study.
Passenger demand in Figure 2 demonstrates that there is a large imbalance in the demand between
the two directions of BRT Line 2. We further calculate the ratio between directional demand and the
average demand of two directions in the following equations:

Westbound boardings at all stations 5179

Ratiowestbound ¼ ¼ ¼ 1:39 > 1:2
Average of westbound and eastbound boardings at all stations 3727:5
(11)

Eastbound boardings at all stations 2276

Ratioeastbound ¼ ¼ ¼ 0:61 < 1:2
Average of westbound and eastbound boardings at all stations 3727:5
(12)

How passenger demand is distributed spatially along a route is a key determinant of which operating
strategy is optimal. In general, if the ratio between directional demand and the average demand of two
directions is greater than 1.2, stop-skipping services can be considered for the direction with low de-
mand. The reason for choosing 1.2 as a threshold value is that 1.2 is used as the best practice by the
transit company in Beijing of China. Using this criterion, stop-skipping service should be considered
for the eastbound direction, which will offer the ability to substantially improve BRT speeds and BRT
line capacity. Moreover, we analyzed the ratio between passenger demand and average passenger de-
mand at each station for two directions, the links between BRT stations and the subway system, station
locations, Chinese regulations concerning the minimum number of stations at which BRT vehicles
must stop, and so on. For example, in the eastbound direction, the third station is connected with a sub-
way station, and the fourth station has a passenger demand to average demand ratio of 2.09. These sta-
tions should not be skipped. The second, fifth, 12th, and 15th stations have the value of passenger
demand to average demand ratio less than 1.2 (in the range of 0.51 to 1.1) and are not connected with
subway stations or schools or busy commercial centers. These stations will be skipped. The terminal
stations should not be skipped and at least half of stations should be stopped in order to maintain an
adequate level of service. Based on these considerations, four stations sets for eastbound stop-skipping
service are designed. Eight stations for eastbound are identified as the stations that make a stop, includ-
ing two terminus and six mid-stations. Accordingly, we can design the candidate sets As of BRT

Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. J. Adv. Transp. 2015; 49:385–401
DOI: 10.1002/atr
 OPTIMIZATION FOR BRT WITH STOP-SKIPPING CONTROL 395

Figure 2. Passenger demand and load profile.

stations. As1 = [1011000110100101]; As2 = [1011011000101001]; As3 = [1011001011001001]; and

As4 = [1011001100101001]. Here, ‘1’ denotes BRT vehicles make a stop and ‘0’ means BRT vehicles
bypass the stations. An optimization is still needed, although the list of As sub sets is provided. This is
because that optimal headway under different candidate set As of BRT stations still needs to be deter-
mined with optimization. Westbound is not suitable for setting stop-skipping services according to
analysis results on the passenger demand at each station. No less two stations can be considered the
station that the BRT vehicle must stop. Therefore, in the study, only eastbound are considered for
stop-skipping services.
Furthermore, data used for the headway optimization model is collected. These data include three
categories:
(1) operational data

Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. J. Adv. Transp. 2015; 49:385–401
DOI: 10.1002/atr
396 X. CHEN ET AL.

These data include BRT station spacing, the number of vehicles for BRT Line 2, cycle and green time
of traffic signals along the BRT Line 2, and BRT operating speed. We collect these data from Beijing
Public Transport Holdings, Ltd.
(2) BRT passenger demand
According to the practical passenger demand, we choose morning peak during weekday as the study
period. Therefore, BRT smart card data from 7:00 to 9:00 AM are collected. Four passenger station
to station O-D trip matrices (each for a 30 min duration) were developed from the smart card data.
(3) other data
Table 1 provides some other data used for the model, such as unit time value, and boarding/alighting
time. It should be noted that unit time values are obtained from our former research.

4.2. Optimization results analysis

The optimization results include the stops to be skipped and the service headways. The optimal stops
to be skipped, which correspond to the minimum costs for the predefined candidate sets, are provided
by using optimization algorithm to select from predefined candidate sets. This section discusses these
results from the developed GA. Considering the potential increase of demand in the future due to the
adjustment of the related bus routes, it is necessary to analyze the impact of demand level on the
performance of the control strategy and evaluate the effectiveness of the new model. The optimal head-
ways with stop-skipping services under four different demand levels (including base demand, 2× base
demand, 3× base demand, and 4× base demand) are determined and the associated costs are compared
with those of using existing headways. Further, the demand level under which the proposed operating
strategy is most advantageous for passengers with an accepted increase of operating costs is identified
and its performance measures are analyzed.

4.2.1. Skipped stops and headway results

The optimal station set is selected if the total costs can be substantially reduced, whereas the opera-
tional costs are still within the acceptance range of the BRT operation company. Table 2 shows the
computational results with all four sets. For this stop-skipping service, the optimized BRT station
set among the four candidate station sets is Aso = As4 = [1011001100101001]. The total cost is mini-
mum with a 22.6% reduction among all four sets while the increase of operating costs is less than
20%, if a 20% increase of operating costs is the maximum acceptance range for the BRT operation
company in Beijing. For As4, eight mid-stations need to be skipped. Figure 3 presents the costs changes
under different demand levels. It is observed that the control strategy is most advantageous under the
demand scenario of 4× base demand in terms of decrease in total costs and increase in operating costs
(less than 20%). Therefore, the optimal BRT headway under this demand level and its associated per-
formance measures are analyzed.

Table I. Some other data.

Data category Data Denotation Value

Associated with Unit time value for waiting time at BRT stations (Yuan/h) Uw 9
passenger Unit time value for BRT in-vehicle time (Yuan/h) Uv 7
Boarding time for each passenger (s/person) τb 1
Alighting time for each passenger (s/person) τa 1
Associated with Rated passenger capacity for all-stop services (person) ca 180
BRT vehicle Rated passenger capacity for added stop-skipping services (person) cs 70
Acceleration-deceleration delay at stations (s) d 10
Vehicle depreciation rates for all-stop services (Yuan/h/vehicle) ra 20
Vehicle depreciation rates for stop-skipping services (Yuan/h/vehicle) rs 10
Unit cost value per kilometer for a BRT vehicle (Yuan/km/vehicle) Uo 4.8

Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. J. Adv. Transp. 2015; 49:385–401
DOI: 10.1002/atr
 OPTIMIZATION FOR BRT WITH STOP-SKIPPING CONTROL 397

Table II. Costs results under all four station sets.

Passenger costs
Operational Waiting In- In-vehicle Total
costs Waiting time costs vehicle time costs costs
Services (Yuan) time (h) (Yuan) time (h) (Yuan) (Yuan)
Without Existing services 6899.4 1011.9 9107.3 13111.9 91782.8 107789.5
optimization
With Services with all-stop As1 8039.7 775.1 6975.9 9811.3 68679.3 83694.9
optimization and added stop- As2 8205.6 770.2 6932.4 9811.3 68679.1 83817.1
skipping services As3 8136.8 752.4 6772.1 9830.0 68810.3 83719.2
As4 8188.3 772.4 6951.8 9748.7 68240.9 83381.0
Percentage Increase/ As1 16.5% 23.4% 23.4% 25.2% 25.2% 22.4%
decrease compared As2 18.9% 23.9% 23.9% 25.2% 25.2% 22.2%
with existing As3 17.9% 25.6% 25.6% 25.0% 25.0% 22.3%
services (%) As4 18.7% 23.7% 23.7% 25.6% 25.6% 22.6%

Figure 3. Costs under different passenger demand levels.

The optimal BRT headway is shown in Table 3. From a practical operation perspective, the value for
optimal headway that can be used in practices is provided in the Table 3.
Operational costs, waiting time, waiting time costs, in-vehicle time, in-vehicle time costs, and total
costs are analyzed in the Table 4.
As shown in Table 4, the total costs are improved with the added stop-skipping services. Compared
with existing all-stop services, operational costs increase by 18.7%, whereas costs associated with

Table III. Existing/optimal BRT headway with versus without stop-skipping service.

Existing Optimal headway without Optimal headway with

headway (min) stop-skipping services (min) stop-skipping services (min)
All-stop All-stop All-stop All-stop All-stop All-stop Stop-skipping
services services services services services services services
Time period westbound eastbound westbound eastbound westbound eastbound eastbound
7:00–7:30 3 4 2 5 2 8 5.5
7:30–8:00 3 3 2 4 2 6 4
8:00–8:30 4 3 2 3 2 5 4
8:30–9:00 5 4 3 3 3 6 3.5

Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. J. Adv. Transp. 2015; 49:385–401
DOI: 10.1002/atr
398 X. CHEN ET AL.

Table IV. Costs for BRT System with versus without optimization.

Passenger costs
Operational Waiting In- In-vehicle Total
costs Waiting time costs vehicle time costs costs
Services (Yuan) time (h) (Yuan) time (h) (Yuan) (Yuan)
Without Existing services 6899.4 1011.9 9107.3 13111.9 91782.8 107789.5
optimization
With optimization All-stop services without 7430.9 688.7 6198.0 10735.6 75149.4 88778.3
added stop-skipping services
With optimization Services with all-stop and 8188.3 772.4 6951.8 9748.7 68240.9 83381.0
added stop-skipping services
Percentage increase/decrease compared 18.7 -23.7 -23.7 -25.6 -25.6 -22.6
with existing services (%)
Percentage increase/decrease compared 10.2 12.2 12.2 -9.2 -9.2 -6.1
with optimized all-stop
services without added
stop-skipping services (%)

passenger waiting and in-vehicle time decease by 23.7% and 25.6%, respectively. The total cost
decreases by 22.6%. Compared with optimized all-stop services without stop-skipping services,
improvements resulting from the proposed method are still achieved; but these benefits are relatively
small. Total costs are reduced by 5.9%. There are an increase of 10.2% for operating costs, an increase
of 12.2% for waiting time costs, and a decrease of 9.2% for in-vehicle time costs. In Table 4, the reason
that optimal results with stop-skipping have more waiting time than optimal results without stop-
skipping is that all stop and stop-skipping services are operating independently and waiting time for
the passengers using stop-skipping services increased greatly, although the bus number increases for
the optimal scenario with stop-skipping. Overall, the total BRT costs are optimized and in-vehicle time
for passengers are further improved with an increase of operational costs and waiting time if the stop-
skipping service is further provided. To evaluate the optimized headways, total person delay and
average turnaround time are examined. Average turnaround time is the average time taken for the
BRT vehicle running from the original terminal to the original terminal. The details of these perfor-
mance measures for BRT Line 2 before versus after optimization are illustrated in Figure 4. According
to existing all-stop headway, the total person delay and turnaround time are 99.8 h and 1.7 h during
morning peak period from 7:00 to 9:00 AM, respectively. If the existing all-stop headway is optimized
without added stop-skipping service, the total person delay increases to 107.1 h and turnaround time is

Figure 4. Comparison of total person delay and average turnaround time for three scenarios.

Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. J. Adv. Transp. 2015; 49:385–401
DOI: 10.1002/atr
 OPTIMIZATION FOR BRT WITH STOP-SKIPPING CONTROL 399

Figure 5. Costs percentage change with the change of the optimal headways.

1.7 h, respectively. If the stop-skipping service is further provided, the introduction of the optimized
stop-skipping service decreases the total person delay to 98.1 h and reduced turnaround time to
1.6 h. This indicates the proposed model improves in total person delay and turnaround time. The
improvements are 2.7% in total person delay and 5.9% in the turnaround time. It can be observed that
the optimization solution with stop-skipping service can provide better service level and operation
efficiency than the other two services with respect to total person delay and average turnaround time.
This can be attributed to the reasonable resource allocation and vehicle assignment/use if the headway
is optimized with the provision of stop-skipping services.
An increase in headway will result in reduced operating costs but increased passenger costs and vice
versa. Figure 5 shows the percentage of change in costs as a function of change in headway. It can be
found that with the optimal headways, passenger costs and total costs can be the lowest while the
increase of operating costs is less than 20%. If the optimal headways are increased with 1 min, the total
costs decrease 19.4% with a 21.4% decrease in passenger costs and an 8.8% increase in operating
costs. Agencies would be willing to increase their operating costs to improve customer services by pro-
viding an optimized solution with stop-skipping service in Beijing because the strong government con-
trol of public transit operations exists and there are need to attract more travelers to the public transit
system. However, the increase in operating costs should be within an acceptable range of the bus com-
pany. Therefore, the accepted headway in the practices depends on such factors.

4.2.2. Algorithm performance analysis

The proposed BRT headway optimization model (with stop-skipping services) and the GA were run on
a PC equipped with 2 GB of random access memory and a Pentium processor running at 2.09 GHz.
The GA model is iterated until convergence is achieved. For four 30 min intervals from 7:00 to
9:00 AM, the iterations of 23, 75, 42, and 61 generation for the headway optimization with the provi-
sion of stop-skipping services.

5. CONCLUSIONS

Bus Rapid Transit has become increasingly popular across China. Methods to enhance its cost-
effectiveness have attracted increasing attention in the past several years. This paper introduces a
new model and an application-oriented solution method to optimize the headway of a BRT system
when the stop-skipping strategy is added. A case study is conducted to demonstrate the effectiveness
of the proposed model using the BRT Line 2 in Beijing. The main findings from this research are sum-
marized as follows:
(1) The stop-skipping control strategy is shown to be advantageous to the existing system without
constructing additional facilities. When new stop-skipping service is added, if the new service

Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. J. Adv. Transp. 2015; 49:385–401
DOI: 10.1002/atr
400 X. CHEN ET AL.

is not properly designed, it may causes frustration for passengers. The proposed methodology
in this study can allow the Beijing bus company to systematically plan all its BRT frequencies
and to allocate BRT vehicles to different routes in a much more efficient way than at present.
(2) The case study for Beijing BRT Line 2 has shown that the total costs is minimal with an
increase of operating costs no more than 20% under 4× base demand, and by optimizing the
headway under this demand level, the optimum headway is between 3.5 and 5.5 min for
stop-skipping services during the morning peak hour, depending on the demand.
(3) When the stop-skipping service is provided, time savings, total and operational costs of the
three scenarios (existing services, optimized all-stop services without stop-skipping services,
and optimized services with all-stop and added stop-skipping services) could be compared.
The results indicate that BRT service level can be improved with a decrease of total cost,
although operating cost is increased. It is a practical operating strategy in Beijing due to the
strong government control of public transit operations and the desire to attract more travelers
to the public transit system.
(4) The proposed methodology resulted in an operational strategy that reduced total person delays
by 2.7% and average turnaround times by 5.9% when compared with the existing service.
It is recommended that the work described in this paper be extended in the following directions.
First, the method should be extended to consider other stop-skipping services, such as stop-skipping
service for two directions and combined frequency benefits for all stop and stop-skipping services.
Other different operation plans, such as the shorter route, can be further tested. Second, the method
should be modified to consider a network of multiple BRT lines within the optimization, which will
provide a platform to test the proposed model and solution algorithm for solving large-sized problems.
Lastly, passenger route choice behavior can be explicitly accounted for with sophisticated modeling
techniques, and the mode choice model in a larger network with BRT, local bus, and metro can be
further studied in the future. Stochastic approach for the user’s station selection and regular/express
bus selection can be considered in the future study.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The authors acknowledge that this paper was prepared based on ‘the National Basic Research Program of
China’ (No. 2012CB725403), and ‘Program for New Century Excellent Talents in University’ (NCET-12-
0763). This research is partially supported by the National Science Foundation (NSF) under grant
#1137732 and NSFC under #71373018. Thanks are also given to the anonymous reviewers for their
helpful comments on this paper.

REFERENCES

1. Cedar A, Wilson NHM. Bus network design. Transportation Research Part B: Methodological 1986; 20(4):331–344.
2. Furth PG, Wilson NHM. Setting frequencies on bus routes: theory and practice. Journal of the Transportation
Research Board 1981; 818:1–7.
3. Cedar A. Bus frequency determination using passenger count data. Transportation Research Part A: General 1984;
18(5-6):439–453.
4. Oudheusden DL, Zhu W. Trip frequency scheduling for bus route management in Bangkok. European Journal of
Operational Research 1995; 83(3):439–451.
5. Delle Site P, Filippi F. Service optimization for bus corridors with short-turn strategies and variable vehicle size.
Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice 1998; 32(1):19–28.
6. Fu L, Liu Q, Calamai P. Real-time optimization model for dynamic scheduling of transit operations. Journal of the
Transportation Research Board 2001; 1857:48–55.
7. Bai ZJ, He GG, Zhao SZ, Wang M. Design and implementation of tabu search algorithm for optimizing BRT
vehicles dispatch. Computer Engineering and Applications 2007; 43(23):229–232.
8. Sun CJ, Zhou W, Wang YQ. Scheduling combination and headway optimization of bus rapid transit. Journal of
Transportation Systems Engineering and Information Technology 2008; 8(5):61–67.
9. Zhao F, Zeng X. Optimization of layout and headway for large-scale transit networks with a combined genetic
algorithm and simulated annealing method. Journal of Engineering Optimization 2006; 38(6):701–722.
10. Kim W, Son B, Chung JH, Kim EC. Development of real-time optimal bus scheduling and headway control models.
Journal of the Transportation Research Board 2009; 2111:33–41.

Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. J. Adv. Transp. 2015; 49:385–401
DOI: 10.1002/atr
 OPTIMIZATION FOR BRT WITH STOP-SKIPPING CONTROL 401

11. Yu B, Yang ZZ, Yao JB. Genetic algorithm for bus frequency optimization. Journal of Transportation Engineering
2010; 136(6):576–583.
12. Hadas Y, Shnaiderman M, Cedar A. Public transit frequency setting using minimum cost approach with stochastic
demand. Proceedings of the 45th Annual Conference of the ORSNZ, Auckland, New Zealand, 2010; 353–362.
13. Cortés CE, Jara-Díaz SR, Tirachini A. Integrating short turning and deadheading in the optimization of transit
services. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice 2011; 45(5):419–434.
14. Tirachini A, Cortés CE, Jara-Díaz SR. Optimal design and benefits of a short turning strategy for a bus corridor.
Transportation 2011; 38(1):169–189.
15. Dell’Olio L, Ibeas A, Ruisanchez F. Optimizing bus-size and headway in transit networks. Transportation 2011;
39(2):449–464.
16. Federal Transit Administration, United States Department of Transportation. Bus rapid transit. 2011. Available
from: http://www.fta.dot.gov/assistance/technology/research_4240.html [accessed on 23 June 2011].
17. Canadian Urban Transit Association. Bus rapid transit: a Canadian perspective. Issues Paper 25, Canadian Urban
Transit Association, Toronto, 2007.
18. Deb K, Chakroborty P. Time scheduling of transit systems with transfer considerations using genetic algorithms.
Evolutionary Computation 1998; 6(1):1–24.
19. The Math Works, Inc. Genetic Algorithm and Direct Search Toolbox for Use with MATLAB User’s Guide Version 1. :
Natick, MA, 2004.

Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. J. Adv. Transp. 2015; 49:385–401
DOI: 10.1002/atr