skip to main content
10.1145/3357000.3366137acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesgisConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article
Public Access

Shortest-Path Diversification through Network Penalization: A Washington DC Area Case Study

Published:05 November 2019Publication History

ABSTRACT

Traditional navigation systems compute the quantitatively shortest or fastest route between two locations in a spatial network. In practice, a problem resulting from all drivers using the shortest path is the congregation of individuals on routes having a high in-betweenness. To this end, several works have proposed methods for proposing alternative routes. In this work, we test solutions for traffic load-balancing by computing diversified routes proposing variants of the penalty method using the road network of the Washington DC metropolitan area as a case study. Our experimental evaluation shows that the tested Penalty-based approaches allow to significantly balance the load of a spatial network, compared to existing k-shortest path algorithms, and compared to a naive baseline that randomly changes the weights of the network at each shortest-path computation.

References

  1. I. Abraham, D. Delling, A. V. Goldberg, and R. F. Werneck. Alternative routes in road networks. In International Symposium on Experimental Algorithms, pages 23--34. Springer, 2010.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. V. Akgün, E. Erkut, and R. Batta. On finding dissimilar paths. European Journal of Operational Research, 121(2):232--246, 2000.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  3. H. Aljazzar and S. Leue. K*: A heuristic search algorithm for finding the k shortest paths. Artificial Intelligence, 175(18):2129--2154, 2011.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. R. Bader, J. Dees, R. Geisberger, and P. Sanders. Alternative route graphs in road networks. In International Conference on Theory and Practice of Algorithms in (Computer) Systems, pages 21--32. Springer, 2011.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. M. E. Baran and F. F. Wu. Network reconfiguration in distribution systems for loss reduction and load balancing. IEEE Transactions on Power delivery, 4(2):1401--1407, 1989.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. R. Bhandari. Survivable networks: algorithms for diverse routing. Springer Science & Business Media, 1999.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. T. Chondrogiannis, P. Bouros, J. Gamper, and U. Leser. Alternative routing: k-shortest paths with limited overlap. In Proceedings of the 23rd SIGSPATIAL International Conference on Advances in Geographic Information Systems, page 68. ACM, 2015.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. T. Chondrogiannis, P. Bouros, J. Gamper, and U. Leser. Exact and approximate algorithms for finding k-shortest paths with limited overlap. In 20th International Conference on Extending Database Technology: EDBT 2017, pages 414--425, 2017.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. G. Cookson. Inrix global traffic scorecard (2017). INRIX Research, February, (published February 2018).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. D. Delling, A. V. Goldberg, T. Pajor, and R. F. Werneck. Customizable route planning. In International Symposium on Experimental Algorithms, pages 376--387. Springer, 2011.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. E. W. Dijkstra. A note on two problems in connexion with graphs. Numerische mathematik, 1(1):269--271, 1959.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. D. Eppstein. Finding the k shortest paths. SIAM Journal on computing, 28(2):652--673, 1998.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. M. Haklay and P. Weber. Openstreetmap: User-generated street maps. IEEE Pervasive Computing, October-December:12--18, 2008.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. M. Kashem, V. Ganapathy, and G. Jasmon. Network reconfiguration for load balancing in distribution networks. IEE Proceedings-Generation, Transmission and Distribution, 146(6):563--567, 1999.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. N. Katoh, T. Ibaraki, and H. Mine. An efficient algorithm for k shortest simple paths. Networks, 12(4):411--427, 1982.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  16. M. Kobitzsch. An alternative approach to alternative routes: Hidar. In European Symposium on Algorithms, pages 613--624. Springer, 2013.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. M. Kobitzsch, M. Radermacher, and D. Schieferdecker. Evolution and evaluation of the penalty method for alternative graphs. 2013.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. H. Liu, C. Jin, B. Yang, and A. Zhou. Finding top-k shortest paths with diversity. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering, 30(3):488--502, 2017.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  19. D. Luxen and D. Schieferdecker. Candidate sets for alternative routes in road networks. In International Symposium on Experimental Algorithms, pages 260--270. Springer, 2012.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. J. P. Rohrer, A. Jabbar, and J. P. Sterbenz. Path diversification: A multipath resilience mechanism. In Design of Reliable Communication Networks, 2009. DRCN 2009. 7th International Workshop on, pages 343--351. IEEE, 2009.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  21. D. Schrank, B. Eisele, T. Lomax, and J. Bak. Urban Mobility Scorecard. The Texas A&M Transportation Institute and INRIX, 2015.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. J. Suurballe. Disjoint paths in a network. Networks, 4(2):125--145, 1974.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  23. J. W. Suurballe and R. E. Tarjan. A quick method for finding shortest pairs of disjoint paths. Networks, 14(2):325--336, 1984.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  24. E. Tiakas, A. N. Papadopoulos, and Y. Manolopoulos. Skyline queries: An introduction. In 2015 6th International Conference on Information, Intelligence, Systems and Applications (IISA), pages 1--6, July 2015.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  25. J. Y. Yen. Finding the k shortest loopless paths in a network. Management Science, 17(11):712--716, 1971.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Shortest-Path Diversification through Network Penalization: A Washington DC Area Case Study

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Login options

      Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

      Sign in
      • Published in

        cover image ACM Conferences
        IWCTS'19: Proceedings of the 12th ACM SIGSPATIAL International Workshop on Computational Transportation Science
        November 2019
        89 pages
        ISBN:9781450369671
        DOI:10.1145/3357000

        Copyright © 2019 ACM

        Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

        Publisher

        Association for Computing Machinery

        New York, NY, United States

        Publication History

        • Published: 5 November 2019

        Permissions

        Request permissions about this article.

        Request Permissions

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • research-article
        • Research
        • Refereed limited

        Acceptance Rates

        Overall Acceptance Rate42of57submissions,74%

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader