Advertisement

Evaluation of Cascade Effects for Transit Networks

  • Antonio Candelieri
  • Ilaria Giordani
  • Bruno G. GaluzziEmail author
  • Francesco Archetti
Chapter
Part of the AIRO Springer Series book series (AIROSS, volume 1)

Abstract

This paper presents a network analysis approach to simulate cascading effects in a transit network with the aim to assess its resilience and efficiency. The key element of a cascade is time: as time passes by, more locations or connections of the transit network which are nodes and edges of the associated graph can be affected consecutively as well as change their own condition. Thus, modifications in terms of efficiency and resilience are also dynamically evaluated and analysed along the cascade. Results on the two case studies of the RESOLUTE project (i.e., Florence, in Italy, and the Attika region, in Greece) are presented. Since the two case studies are significantly different, important differences are reflected also on the impacts of the relative cascades, even if they were started in both the two cases from the node with the highest betweenness centrality.

Keywords

Network analysis Resilience Cascading effects Urban transport system 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work has been supported by the RESOLUTE project (http://www.RESOLUTE-eu.org) and has been funded within the European Commissions H2020 Programme under contract number 653460. This paper expresses the opinions of the authors and not necessarily those of the European Commission. The European Commission is not liable for any use that may be made of the information contained in this paper.

References

  1. 1.
    Ash, J., Newth, D.: Optimizing complex networks for resilience against cascading failure. Phys. Stat. Mech. Appl. (2007).  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physa.2006.12.058CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Buldyrev, S., Parshani, R., Paul, G., Stanley, H., Havlin, S.: Catastrophic cascade of failures in interdependent networks. Nature (2010).  https://doi.org/10.1038/nature08932CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Motter, A.: Cascade control and defense in complex networks. Phys. Rev. Lett. 93 (2004).  https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.93.098701
  4. 4.
    Phadke, A., Thorp, J.: Expose hidden failures to prevent cascading outages [in power systems]. Comput. Appl. Power IEEE (1996).  https://doi.org/10.1109/67.526849CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    D’Lima, M., Medda, F.: A new measure of resilience: an application to the London Underground. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Practise (2015).  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2015.05.017Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gutfraind, A.: Optimizing network topology for cascade resiliance. In: Handbook of Optimization in Complex Networks (2012).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-0857-4_2Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Candelieri, A., Archetti, F.: Detecting events and sentiment on twitter for improving urban mobility. ESSEM AAMAS 1351, 106–115 (2015)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Soldi, D., Candelieri, A., Archetti, F.: Resilience and vulnerability in urban water distribution networks through network theory and hydraulic simulation. Proc. Eng. 2015(119), 1259–1268 (2015).  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2015.08.990CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Crucitti, P., Latora, V., Marchiori, M.: Model for cascading failures in complex networks. Phys. Rev. E. 69(4), 045–104 (2004).  https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.69.045104
  10. 10.
    Lai, Y., Motter, A., Nishikawa, T.: Attacks and cascades in complex networks. Complex Netw. Lect. Notes Phys. (2004).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-44485-5_14CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Nagurney, A., Qiang, Q.: A network efficiency measure for congested networks. EPL (Europhysics Letters) (2007).  https://doi.org/10.1209/0295-5075/79/38005CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Zou, Z., Xiao, Y., Gao, J.: Robustness analysis of urban transit network based on complex networks theory. Kybernetes 42(3), 383–399 (2013).  https://doi.org/10.1108/03684921311323644CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Von Ferber, C., Holovatch, T., Holovatch, Y., Palchykov, Y.: Public transport networks: empirical analysis and modeling. Eur. Phys. J. B (2009).  https://doi.org/10.1140/epjb/e2009-00090-xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Freeman, L.C.: A set of measures of centrality based on betweenness. Sociometry (1977).  https://doi.org/10.2307/3033543CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Latora, V., Marchiori, M.: Efficient behavior of small-world networks. Phys. Rev. Lett. (2001).  https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.87.198701
  16. 16.
    Latora, V., Marchiori, M.: Is the Boston subway a small-world network? Phys. A Stat. Mech. Appl. (2002).  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-4371(02)01089-0CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Antonio Candelieri
    • 1
    • 2
  • Ilaria Giordani
    • 1
    • 2
  • Bruno G. Galuzzi
    • 1
    Email author
  • Francesco Archetti
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Computer Science, Systems and CommunicationsUniversity of Milano-BicoccaMilanItaly
  2. 2.Consorzio Milano-RicercheMilanItaly

Personalised recommendations