Optimization of Multimodal Discrete Network Design Problems Based on Super Networks

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This is my comments on the manuscript, “applsci-1382159”, “Optimization of Multimodal Discrete Network Design Problem Based on Super Network”.

 

To my understanding, the paper presented a methodology to obtain a near optimal solution for the multi-modal traffic assignment problem. The authors proposed a bi-objective algorithm to solve the transportation assignment problem by the minimization of both of the network operation and construction costs. The transportation network was modeled as a super-network.

 

The idea of the paper is good, the paper is well written and easy to follow.

 

My comments:

• The page number is 4 for all pages. Please fix that.

• Line 118: What is SUE stands for? I think it stand for Stochastic user equilibrium

• lines 158-161: the authors used the Roman Numerals (I, II, III,…) to refer to the different sections of the paper, but later on they used instead the Arabic Numerals (1,2,3,…). Please fix that.

• Figure # 1: change “Drving Links” to “Driving Links”

• Table # 4 already shows all the used variables/coefficients, so why the authors repeated them after the used equations.

• I think the main contribution of the paper is the proposed bi-objective algorithm to solve the transportation assignment problem by estimating a near optimal solution. I was looking to see a comparison with the exact solution algorithm, in terms for example of the required time to solve the problem. In addition, what is the threshold in terms of the network size that the proposed algorithm shall be superior to the use of the exact solution algorithm.

• In addition, I was expcting that the authors will compare theier algrozim with previous proposed methods, for example:

   

  Leblanc, Larry J. "An algorithm for the discrete network design problem." Transportation Science 9, no. 3 (1975): 183-199. Which was not even mentioned in the paper.

•  
• Wang, Shuaian, Qiang Meng, and Hai Yang. "Global optimization methods for the discrete network design problem." Transportation Research Part B: Methodological 50 (2013): 42-60.
•  
• Wang, David ZW, Haoxiang Liu, and W. Y. Szeto. "A novel discrete network design problem formulation and its global optimization solution algorithm." Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review 79 (2015): 213-230.

Finally, I hope that my comments will help to improve your paper.

Regards,

Author Response

Dear reviewer:

Thank you very much for your careful reading and thoughtful review of our paper. We have revised the paper with your recommendations. Revised portions are marked in red on the paper.  Please see the attachment for the response to the comments in the report.

Best regards,
Yaling Zhou

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

It is a very well written manuscript. I recommend publish it as it is.

Author Response

Dear reviewer:

Thank you very much for your affirmation of our paper, and thank you again for recommending to publish our paper.

Best regards,

Yaling Zhou

Reviewer 3 Report

In this paper, the authors study the multimodal discrete network design problem that simultaneously optimizes the car, bus, and rail transit network, in which inter-modal transfers are achieved by slow traffic modes including walking and bike-sharing.

The authors developed a programming model to minimize the network operation cost and construction cost with traffic flow equilibrium constraints, investment constraints, and expansion constraints. The effectiveness of the proposed model and algorithm is evaluated through two numerical tests: a simple test network and a multimodal transport network.

Two numerical tests were used to validate the proposed model and algorithm: a simple test network and an actual network. There is no description of the actual network. The only information provided is an area of Beijing, China. I recommend describing the network and the reasons for selecting this specific network.

The Conclusion section needs major changes. I recommend several improvements including adding practical implications, limitations, and future work.

Author Response

Dear reviewer:

Thank you very much for your careful reading and thoughtful review of our paper. We have revised the paper with your recommendations. Revised portions are marked in red on the paper. Please see the attachment for the response to the comments in the report.

Best regards,
Yaling Zhou

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 3 Report

I have no additional comments. Thanks.