Abstract
This paper proposes an overview of transport system vulnerability assessment models that allow identifying critical links for the development of future high quality transport management systems (TMS). The challenges of increasing congestion and negative environmental impacts, shifting trips from personal vehicles to other transport options is generally seen as one of the most important actions. In terms of resilience and business continuity, transport systems need to be efficient as well as robust, as their vulnerability may cause various negative impacts. The methodological approach is particularly useful for planning resilient response in the preparedness stage, prioritizing investment for mitigation and adaptation, and prioritizing the rehabilitation (access restoration) of the disrupted links in the response and recovery stages. Resilience accounts for not only the ability of the system to absorb externally induced changes, but also cost-effective and efficient, adaptive actions that can be taken to preserve or restore performance post-event.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Mattsson, L.G., Jenelius, E.: Vulnerability and resilience of transport systems—a discussion of recent research. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 81, 16–34 (2015)
Rodríguez-Núñez, E., García-Palomares, J.C.: Measuring the vulnerability of public transport networks. J. Transp. Geogr. 35, 50–63 (2014)
Cats, O., Jenelius, E.: Planning for the unexpected: the value of reserve capacity for public transport network robustness. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 81, 47–61 (2015)
Cats, O., Jenelius, E.: Beyond a complete failure: the impact of partial capacity degradation on public transport network vulnerability. Transportmet. B 6, 77–96 (2018)
Zhang, X., Miller-Hooks, E., Denny, K.: Assessing the role of network topology in transportation network resilience. J. Transp. Geogr. 46, 35–45 (2015)
Cats, O., Yap, M., van Oort, N.: Exposing the role of exposure: public transport network risk analysis. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 88, 1–14 (2016)
Rehak, D., Slivkova, S., Brabcova, V.: Indication of critical infrastructure resilience failure. Cepin, M., Bris, R. (eds.) Safety and Reliability – Theory and Application (ESREL), pp. 955–962. CRC Press, London (2017)
Bukvić, L., Smolković, M., Pašagić Škrinjar, J.: Implementation of blockchain in logistics and digital communication-short overview. In: Proceedings of 11th Supply Chain Management for Efficient Consumer Response Conference, p. 12 (2020)
Utne, I.B., Hokstad, P., Vatn, J.: A method for risk modeling of interdependencies in critical infrastructures. Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 96(6), 671–678 (2011)
McGee, S., Frittman, J., Ahn, S.J., Murray, S.: Risk relationships and cascading effects in critical infrastructure: implication for the hyogo framework. In: Applied Systems Thinking Institute (ASysT) Global Assessment Report on Disaster Risk Reduction 2015. 36 p. (2014)
Candelieri, A., Galuzzi, B.G., Giordani, I., Archetti, F.: Vulnerability of public transportation networks against directed attacks and cascading failures. Publ. Transp. 11, 27–49 (2019)
Kong, H.-K., Hong, M.K., Kim, T.-S.: Security risk assessment framework for smart car using the attack tree analysis. J. Ambient. Intell. Humaniz. Comput. 9, 1–21 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12652-016-0442-8
Török, A., Szalay, Z., Uti, G., Verebélyi, B.: Modelling the effects of certain cyber-attack methods on urban autonomous transport systems, case study of Budapest. J. Ambient. Intell. Humaniz. Comput. 11, 1629–1643 (2020)
Al-Mohannadi, H., Mirza, Q., Namanya, A., Awan, I., Cullen, A., Disso, J.: Cyber-attack modeling analysis techniques: an overview. In: 2016 IEEE 4th International Conference on Future Internet of Things and Cloud Workshops (FiCloudW), pp. 69–76 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1109/W-FiCloud.2016.29
Daganzo, C.F.: Urban gridlock: macroscopic modeling and mitigation approaches. Transp. Res. Part B 41(1), 49–62 (2007)
Geroliminis, N., Daganzo, C.F.: Macroscopic modeling of traffic in cities. In: The 86th Transportation Research Board Annual Meeting. Paper No. 07-0413, Washington, DC (2007)
Geroliminis, N., Daganzo, C.F.: Existence of urban-scale macroscopic fundamental diagrams: some experimental findings. Transp. Res. Part B 42(9), 759–770 (2008)
Geroliminis, N., Sun, J.: Properties of a well-defined macroscopic fundamental diagram for urban traffic. Transp. Res. Part B 45, 605–617 (2011)
Knoop, V.L., Hoogendoorn, S.P., Van Lint, J.W.C.: Impact of traffic dynamics on the macroscopic fundamental diagram. In: Transportation Research Board 92nd Annual Meeting (2013)
Mazloumian, A., Geroliminis, N., Helbing, D.: The spatial variability of vehicle densities as determinant of urban network capacity. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. A 368, 4627–4647 (2010)
Jenelius, E.: Geography and road network vulnerability: regional equity vs. economic efficiency. In: 9th Network on European Communications and Transport Activities Research (NECTAR) Conference, Porto, Portugal (2007)
Jenelius, E.: User inequity implications of road network vulnerability. J. Transp. Land Use 2(3–4), 57–73 (2010)
Jenelius, E., Mattsson, L.G.: Road network vulnerability analysis of area-covering disruptions: a grid-based approach with case study. Transp. Res. Part A 46, 746–760 (2012)
Taylor, M.A.P., D’Este, G.M.: Critical infrastructure and transport network vulnerability: developing a method for diagnosis and assessment. In: Proceedings of the Second International Symposium on Transportation Network Reliability (INSTR 2004). Department of Civil Engineering, University of Canterbury, Christchurch, pp. 96–102 (2004)
Takács, Á., Drexler, D.A., Galambos, P., Rudas, I.J., Haidegger, T.: Assessment and standardization of autonomous vehicles. In: IEEE 22nd International Conference on Intelligent Engineering Systems (INES), pp. 185–192 (2018)
Debernard, S., Chauvin, C., Pokam, R., Langlois, S.: Designing human-machine interface for autonomous vehicles. IFAC, Elsevier 49(19), 609–614 (2016)
Tsekeris, T., Geroliminis, N.: City size, network structure and traffic congestion. J. Urban Econ. 76, 1–14 (2013)
Saeedmanesh, M., Geroliminis, N.: Clustering of heterogeneous networks with directional flows based on “Snake” similarities. Transp. Res. Part B Methodol. 91, 250–269 (2016)
Alonso, A., Monzón, A., Cascajo, R.: Comparative analysis of passenger transport sustainability in European cities. Ecol. Ind. 48, 578–592 (2015)
Klinger, T., Kenworthy, J.R., Lanzendorf, M.: Dimensions of urban mobility cultures - a comparison of German cities. J. Transp. Geogr. 31, 18–29 (2013)
Berki, Z., Monigl, J.: Trip generation and distribution modelling in Budapest. Transp. Res. Procedia 27, 172–179 (2017)
Panteleeva, M., Borozdina, S.: Model development of expert estimation of quality of transport interchange functioning. In: MATEC Web of Conferences, vol. 193, p. 01011. EDP Sciences (2018)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
Bukvić, L., Škrinjar, J.P., Škorput, P., Vrančić, M.T. (2022). Overview of Resilience Processes in Transport Management Systems. In: Karabegović, I., Kovačević, A., Mandžuka, S. (eds) New Technologies, Development and Application V. NT 2022. Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems, vol 472. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-05230-9_76
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-05230-9_76
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-031-05229-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-031-05230-9
eBook Packages: Intelligent Technologies and RoboticsIntelligent Technologies and Robotics (R0)