CN110991794A - Urban rail and public transport two-network fusion level evaluation method - Google Patents

Abstract

The invention provides an urban rail and public transport two-network fusion level evaluation method, which comprises the following steps of S1) acquiring the actual walking distance of a bus stop reaching a radius range of 100 meters of a straight line of a rail traffic entrance by taking each entrance of the rail traffic stop as a starting point, and evaluating the facility fusion level; step S2) based on the operation shift time of the station rail transit, considering the transfer time, comparing the operation time of the bus station stop line within the range of 100 meters, calculating the average transfer waiting time, comparing the acceptable waiting time, and evaluating the operation fusion level; step S3), analyzing the scale of passenger flow of the bus station transferring rail transit within the range of 100 meters, comparing the scale with the total scale of passenger flow of getting on and off the bus at the station, calculating the ratio of transfer scale, and evaluating the fusion level of passenger flow; step S4) establishing an urban rail transit and public transport two-network fusion evaluation model; the invention has the characteristics of relative dynamism, multi-factor refinement, authenticity and practicability.

Description

Urban rail and public transport two-network fusion level evaluation method

Technical Field

The invention relates to the field of rail transit, in particular to an urban rail and bus two-network fusion level evaluation method.

Background

In order to improve the happiness and the acquisition feeling of people, the quality improvement of public transportation service has pertinence and directionality, and the refined evaluation is an important basis for realizing the quality improvement of public transportation.

In the traditional two-network fusion evaluation at the present stage, the matching condition of the public transportation facilities within the radius range of 50 meters or 100 meters at the rail transit station is mostly based, on one hand, the evaluation is relatively static by measuring the linear distance without considering the matching condition with the actual road network; on the other hand, only the condition of the matched public transportation facility is evaluated, consideration is not given to the aspects of operation rationality of the facility, consistency of passenger flow demands and the like, and evaluation is relatively single.

In order to realize relatively dynamic and multi-factor fine evaluation, an evaluation method for the fusion level of the urban rail transit network and the conventional public transit network is formed by combining the matching condition of the actual pedestrian road network and facility operation and the consistent condition of passenger flow requirements, so that important basic guarantee is provided for further improving the quality of public transit service and realizing fine management.

Disclosure of Invention

The invention aims to provide an urban rail and public transport two-network fusion level evaluation method.

In order to achieve the purpose, the technical scheme of the invention is as follows:

a method for evaluating the integration level of an urban rail network and a public transport network is characterized by comprising the following steps:

step S1) obtaining the actual walking distance of the bus stop reaching the track traffic entrance within the radius range of 100 meters by taking each entrance and exit of the track traffic stop as a starting point, and evaluating the facility fusion level;

step S2) based on the operation shift time of the station rail transit, considering the transfer time, comparing the operation time of the bus station stop line within the range of 100 meters, calculating the average transfer waiting time, comparing the acceptable waiting time, and evaluating the operation fusion level;

step S3), analyzing the scale of passenger flow of the bus station transferring rail transit within the range of 100 meters, comparing the scale with the total scale of passenger flow of getting on and off the bus at the station, calculating the ratio of transfer scale, and evaluating the fusion level of passenger flow;

step S4) establishing an urban rail transit and public transport two-network fusion evaluation model.

Further, in the step S1, the step of obtaining the actual walking distance includes the steps of:

step S11), acquiring a rail transit station and each gateway of the station based on the opening metadata of the electronic map;

step S12), acquiring a ground bus stop and a corresponding stop line based on the opening metadata of the electronic map;

step S13) taking the entrance and exit of the rail transit station as round points, and using GIS software to make a buffer area with the radius of 100 m;

step S14) utilizing GIS software to intersect the buffer area and the ground bus stop to obtain the bus stop contained in the radius range of 100 meters of the straight line of the track traffic entrance and exit;

step S15) based on the opening metadata of the electronic map, with the entrance and the exit of the rail transit station as the starting point and the corresponding bus station obtained in the step S14 as the end point, planning the walking path, calculating the walking distance and the walking time consumption, and obtaining the walking connection distance L of the station i_{Walking connection i}And the time consumption T for walking connection_{Walking connection i}。

Further, in the step S1, the evaluating the facility fusion level includes the steps of:

step S16) defining the facility fusion of the bus stop i and the rail transit: s_{Facility i}＝100-(L_{Walking connection i}/L_{Straight distance i}-1)×100；

Step S17) defines a facility fusion level: s_Facility＝(S_{Facility 1}+S_{Facility 2}+…+S_{Facility n}) And/n, wherein n is a natural number greater than 0.

Further, in the step S2, the step of calculating the waiting time for the average transfer includes the steps of:

step S21), calculating transfer time consumption including passenger outbound time consumption and time consumption of walking connection to a corresponding bus stop at an outbound port:

T_{transfer i}＝T_{Go out of station}+T_{Walking connection i}

In the above formula, T_{Transfer i}Total time consumption for transfer with bus station i, T_{Go out of station}For average outbound time consumption, T_{Walking connection i}The time consumption for walking connection;

step S22) calculates the average transfer waiting time:

T_{transfer waiting i}＝T_{Bus j}-(T_{Track i}+T_{Transfer i}) Wherein, T_{Bus j}＝min{T_{Bus 1},T_{Bus 2},…,T_{Bus n}And (c) the step of (c) in which,

T_{bus j}-(T_{Track i}+T_{Transfer i})>0

In the above formula, T_{Transfer waiting i}Transfer waiting time T consumed for transferring the ground buses for the ith track traffic_{Bus j}Is later than the i-th class operation time T_{Track i}And T_{Transfer i}The minimum value of the bus operating time of the sum;

T_{average transfer wait}＝average(T_{Transfer waiting 1},T_{Transfer waiting 2},…T_{Transfer waiting n}) Wherein n is a natural number greater than 0.

Further, in the step S2, the operation fusion level evaluation includes the following steps:

comparing the average transfer waiting time with the acceptable waiting time, and setting the evaluation operation fusion level as

S_Operation＝100-(T_{Average transfer wait}/T_{Experience transfer wait}-1)×100；

In the above formula, T_{Average transfer wait}Average transfer latency time, T, calculated in step (b) for average transfer latency time_{Experience transfer wait}And obtaining an experience value by urban bus satisfaction survey.

Further, in the step S3, the passenger flow fusion evaluation includes the following steps:

step S31) setting station S_{Passenger flow i}＝C_{Transfer i}/C_i×100

In the above formula, S_{Passenger flow i}Level of fusion of passenger flows for site i, C_{Transfer i}Passenger flow for rail traffic at station i, C_iThe bus passenger flow is station i;

step S32) sets the fusion level S_{Passenger flow}＝(S_{Passenger flow 1}+S_{Passenger flow 2}+…+S_{Passenger flow n}) And/n, wherein n is a natural number greater than 0.

Further, in the step S4, the establishing of the urban rail transit and public transportation two-network fusion evaluation model includes the following steps:

step S41) urban rail transit and public transport two-network fusion level S_{Two-network convergence}＝A₁×S_Facility+A₂×S_Operation+A₃×S_{Passenger flow}，

In the above formula, S_FacilityFor facility fusion level evaluation, S_OperationFor operational fusion level evaluation, S_{Passenger flow}For evaluation of the level of fusion of passenger flow, A₁Weight for facility fusion level evaluation, A₂Weight for operation fusion level evaluation, A₃Evaluating the weight for the passenger flow fusion level;

step S42) determining weight A in the urban rail transit and public transport two-network fusion level evaluation model through an analytic hierarchy process₁、A₂、A₃；

Step S43) establishing an urban rail transit and public transport two-network fusion level evaluation model.

In the step S42, the determining the weight by the analytic hierarchy process includes the steps of:

step S421) constructing a judgment matrix forComparing every two indexes to obtain relative importance of one index, and constructing judgment matrix (a) by 1-9 level scale method_ij)_3×3Element a in the matrix_ijRepresents element A_iRelative to A_jDegree of importance of, the decision matrix (a)_ij)_3×3In (a)_ij>0，a_ji＝1/a_ij，a_ii1, wherein i and j are natural numbers from 1 to 3;

step S422) single-criterion sorting, for the judgment matrix, obtaining a weight vector through column normalization → a sum method → a row rule I, and calculating to obtain a maximum eigenvalue by combining the judgment matrix, namely calculating an eigenvalue root lambda max and an eigenvector W which meet the condition that AW is lambda maxW, wherein W is a normalized eigenvector corresponding to the lambda max;

step 423) using the CR index to judge, when CR is less than 0.1, the consistency of the judgment matrix is considered to be acceptable, and when CR is more than 0.1, the judgment matrix is considered not to meet the consistency requirement, and the judgment matrix is revised again.

The invention has the characteristics of relative dynamism, multi-factor refinement, authenticity and practicability.

(1) And (3) relative dynamic: compared with the current situation that the matching condition of the bus facilities within the radius range of 50 meters or 100 meters of the rail transit station is measured based on the straight line distance, the step distance based on the actual road network condition is considered, and the relative dynamic state is evaluated.

(2) Multi-factor refinement: compared with the current situation evaluation, the method not only evaluates the matching situation of the facility, but also considers the operation rationality of the facility and the consistency of the passenger flow demand, and comprehensively and finely evaluates the two-network fusion level based on three factors.

(3) Authenticity: based on the actual road network and the actual path, the actual operation plan and the actual passenger flow, compared with the traditional relatively static and single evaluation, the comprehensive evaluation result is more objective and more realistic.

(4) The practicability is as follows: the method is researched and proposed under the background of rapid development of rail transit of all cities in the country, meets the requirements of deepened assessment and consolidated establishment result assessment of the establishment level of all cities in the country, has good application value and has great practicability.

Drawings

FIG. 1 is a schematic flow diagram of the present invention;

FIG. 2 is a schematic flow chart of step 1 of the present invention;

FIG. 3 is a schematic flow chart of step 2 of the present invention;

FIG. 4 is a schematic flow chart of step 3 of the present invention;

FIG. 5 is a schematic flow chart of step 4 of the present invention.

Detailed Description

The technical solutions of the present invention will be described clearly and completely with reference to the accompanying drawings, and it should be understood that the described embodiments are some, but not all embodiments of the present invention. All other embodiments, which can be derived by a person skilled in the art from the embodiments given herein without making any creative effort, shall fall within the protection scope of the present invention.

The embodiment discloses an urban rail and public transport two-network fusion level evaluation method, as shown in fig. 1, comprising the following steps:

step S1), facility fusion evaluation is carried out, the actual walking distance of the bus stop reaching the radius range of 100 meters of the straight line of the rail transit entrance and exit is obtained by taking each entrance and exit of the rail transit stop as a starting point, and the facility fusion level is evaluated;

step S2), operation fusion evaluation, namely, based on the operation shift time of station track traffic, considering transfer time, comparing the operation time of bus station stop lines within the range of 100 meters, calculating the average transfer waiting time, comparing the acceptable waiting time, and evaluating the operation fusion level;

step S3), passenger flow fusion evaluation, wherein the scale of bus station passenger flow transfer rail transit within 100 meters is analyzed and compared with the total scale of the passenger flow of the station for getting on and off the bus, the transfer scale ratio is calculated, and the passenger flow fusion level is evaluated;

step S4) establishing an urban rail transit and public transport two-network fusion evaluation model.

In the step S1, the step of acquiring the actual walking distance includes the steps of:

step S11), based on the opening metadata of the electronic map, obtaining the urban rail transit station and each entrance and exit of the station through a corresponding interface;

step S12), based on the opening metadata of the electronic map, obtaining the urban ground bus stop and the corresponding stop line through the corresponding interface;

step S13), taking the entrance and exit of the rail transit station obtained in the step S11 as round points, and using GIS software to make a buffer area with the radius of 100 m;

step S14), crossing the buffer area obtained in the step S13 and the bus stop obtained in the step S12 by using GIS software to obtain the bus stop contained in the radius range of 100 meters of the straight line of the track traffic entrance and exit;

step S15) based on the opening metadata of the electronic map, planning a walking path by taking the entrance and the exit of the rail transit station obtained in the step S11 as a starting point and the corresponding bus station obtained in the step S14 as an end point through a corresponding interface, calculating the walking distance and the walking time consumption, and obtaining the walking connection distance L of the station i_{Walking connection i}And the time consumption T for walking connection_{Walking connection i}. See table 1.

TABLE 1 Walking path and distance between certain exit of rail transit station and bus station

In the step S1, the evaluating the facility fusion level includes the steps of:

step S16) defining the facility fusion of the bus stop i and the rail transit: s_{Facility i}＝100-(L_{Walking connection i}/L_{Straight distance i}-1)×100；

Step S17) defines a facility fusion level: s_Facility＝(S_{Facility 1}+S_{Facility 2}+…+S_{Facility n}) And/n, wherein n is a natural number greater than 0, where n is 4.

In the step S2, the step of calculating the waiting time for the average transfer includes the steps of:

step S21), calculating transfer time consumption including passenger outbound time consumption and time consumption of walking connection to a corresponding bus stop at an outbound port:

T_{transfer i}＝T_{Go out of station}+T_{Walking connection i}

In the above formula, T_{Transfer i}Total time consumption for transfer with bus station i, T_{Go out of station}For average outbound time consumption, T_{Go out of station}For the classified survey acquisition, the classification is obtained by the field survey of transfer stations and non-transfer stations, T_{Walking connection i}For connection to foot, T_{Walking connection i}The actual walking distance is obtained through calculation in the step S15, and specific numerical values are shown in a table 2;

TABLE 2 time for bus departure and transfer at a stop and acceptable waiting time in the area

Bus stop number i	Outbound walk time(s): TGo out of station	Walk transfer time(s): TWalking connection i	Empirical transfer latency(s): TExperience transfer wait
				1	120	70	228
2	120	70	228
				3	120	59	228
4	120	59	228

Step S22) calculates the average transfer waiting time:

T_{transfer waiting i}＝T_{Bus j}-(T_{Track i}+T_{Transfer i}) Wherein, T_{Bus j}＝min{T_{Bus 1},T_{Bus 2},…,T_{Bus n}And (c) the step of (c) in which,

T_{bus j}-(T_{Track i}+T_{Transfer i})>0

In the above formula, T_{Transfer waiting i}Transfer waiting time T consumed for transferring the ground buses for the ith track traffic_{Bus j}Is later than the i-th class operation time T_{Track i}And T_{Transfer i}The minimum value of the bus operating time of the sum;

T_{average transfer wait}＝average(T_{Transfer waiting 1},T_{Transfer waiting 2},…T_{Transfer waiting n}) Wherein n is 31.

In step S2, the operation fusion level evaluation includes the following steps:

comparing the average transfer waiting time with the acceptable waiting time, and setting the evaluation operation fusion level as

S_Operation＝100-(T_{Average transfer wait}/T_{Experience transfer wait}-1)×100；

In the above formula, T_{Average transfer wait}Average transfer latency time, T, calculated in step (b) for average transfer latency time_{Experience transfer wait}And obtaining an experience value by urban bus satisfaction survey. See tables 3 and 4 for specific values.

TABLE 3 track traffic station corresponding to bus stop certain line operation shift

Shift number j	Time of shift TBus j	The number of shifts: j is a function of	Time of shift TBus j	Shift number j	Time of shift TBus j
						1	0:03	11	9:18	21	16:08
2	6:23	12	9:38	22	16:28
						3	6:38	13	10:08	23	16:48
4	6:58	14	10:38	24	17:08
						5	7:18	15	11:38	25	17:28
6	7:38	16	12:38	26	17:48
						7	7:58	17	13:38	27	18:08
8	8:18	18	14:38	28	18:28
						9	8:38	19	15:08	29	18:48
10	8:58	20	15:38	30	19:08

TABLE 4 Rail exchange station corresponding to rail exchange line operation shift

Number of shift	Shift TTrack i
		1	04:57:05
2	05:51:21
		3	05:41:37
4	05:11:51
		5	05:21:51
6	06:21:55
		7	05:34:01
8	06:35:41
		9	06:29:46
10	06:46:03
		…	…
260	22:31:12
		261	22:47:58
262	22:57:28
		263	23:07:08
264	23:02:28
		265	23:17:20
266	23:22:56
		267	23:31:56
268	23:38:55

In step S3, the passenger flow fusion evaluation includes the following steps, and the specific values are shown in table 5:

step S31) setting station S_{Passenger flow i}＝C_{Transfer i}/C_i×100

In the above formula, S_{Passenger flow i}Level of fusion of passenger flows for site i, C_{Transfer i}Passenger flow for rail traffic at station i, C_iThe bus passenger flow is station i;

step S32) sets the fusion level S_{Passenger flow}＝(S_{Passenger flow 1}+S_{Passenger flow 2}+…+S_{Passenger flow n}) And/n, where n is 4.

TABLE 5 number of transfer and total passenger flows for each station

Bus stop numbering: i.e. i	Number of passengers on the rail exchange bus: cTransfer i	The total number of people: ci
			1	27	42
2	21	30
			3	17	49
4	11	50

In the step S4, the establishing of the urban rail transit and public transportation network fusion evaluation model includes the following steps:

step S41) urban rail transit and public transport two-network fusion level S_{Two-network convergence}＝A₁×S_Facility+A₂×S_Operation+A₃×S_{Passenger flow}，

In the above formula, S_FacilityFor facility fusion level evaluation, S_OperationFor operational fusion level evaluation, S_{Passenger flow}For evaluation of the level of fusion of passenger flow, A₁Weight for facility fusion level evaluation, A₂Weight for operation fusion level evaluation, A₃Evaluating the weight for the passenger flow fusion level;

step S42) determining weight A in the urban rail transit and public transport two-network fusion level evaluation model through an analytic hierarchy process₁、A₂、A₃；

Step S43) establishing an urban rail transit and public transport two-network fusion level evaluation model.

And finally, comprehensively evaluating the fusion level of the two networks according to the two-network fusion level evaluation model.

In step S42, the step of determining the weight by the analytic hierarchy process is as follows:

step S421) referring to Table 6, constructing a judgment matrix for pairwise comparison between indexes to obtain the relative importance of a certain index, and constructing the judgment matrix (a) by adopting a 1-9-level scaling method_ij)_3×3Element a in the matrix_ijRepresents element A_iRelative to A_jDegree of importance of, the decision matrix (a)_ij)_3×3In (a)_ij>0，a_ji＝1/a_ij，a_ii1, wherein i and j are natural numbers from 1 to 3;

table 6: decision matrix scaling method

Step S422) single criterion sorting; for the judgment matrix, obtaining a weight vector through column normalization → a sum method → a row rule I, and calculating to obtain a maximum characteristic value by combining the judgment matrix, namely calculating a characteristic root lambda max and a characteristic vector W which meet the condition that AW is lambda maxW, wherein W is a normalized characteristic vector corresponding to the lambda max;

step S423) consistency check; in order to ensure that the calculated conclusion is basically reasonable, the deviation of the judgment matrix needs to be limited within a certain range, and then consistency check is carried out. Here, the determination is performed by using a CR (consistency ratio) index, and when CR is less than 0.1, it is considered that the consistency of the determination matrix is acceptable, and when CR is greater than 0.1, it is considered that the determination matrix does not meet the requirement of consistency, and the determination matrix needs to be re-corrected.

Finally, calculating to obtain each weight A₁＝0.2、A₂＝0.2、A₃0.6, and CR 0 <0.1 in consistency test, namely meeting the requirement, namely the urban rail transit and public transportation two-network fusion level S_{Two-network convergence}＝0.2×S_Facility+0.2×S_Operation+0.6×S_{Passenger flow}And similarly, calculating the fusion level of other sites in the city, namely realizing the sequencing evaluation of the overall two-network fusion level of the city and finding out the fusion strong items and the fusion weak points of the sites.

Finally, it should be noted that: the above embodiments are only used to illustrate the technical solution of the present invention, and not to limit the same; while the invention has been described in detail and with reference to the foregoing embodiments, it will be understood by those skilled in the art that: the technical solutions described in the foregoing embodiments may still be modified, or some or all of the technical features may be equivalently replaced; and the modifications or the substitutions do not make the essence of the corresponding technical solutions depart from the scope of the technical solutions of the embodiments of the present invention.

Claims (8)

1. A method for evaluating the integration level of an urban rail network and a public transport network is characterized by comprising the following steps:

step S1) obtaining the actual walking distance of the bus stop reaching the track traffic entrance within the radius range of 100 meters by taking each entrance and exit of the track traffic stop as a starting point, and evaluating the facility fusion level;

step S2) based on the operation shift time of the station rail transit, considering the transfer time, comparing the operation time of the bus station stop line within the range of 100 meters, calculating the average transfer waiting time, comparing the acceptable waiting time, and evaluating the operation fusion level;

step S3), analyzing the scale of passenger flow of the bus station transferring rail transit within the range of 100 meters, comparing the scale with the total scale of passenger flow of getting on and off the bus at the station, calculating the ratio of transfer scale, and evaluating the fusion level of passenger flow;

step S4) establishing an urban rail transit and public transport two-network fusion evaluation model.

2. The evaluation method according to claim 1, wherein in the step S1, the step of acquiring the actual walking distance includes the steps of:

step S11), acquiring a rail transit station and each gateway of the station based on the opening metadata of the electronic map;

step S12), acquiring a ground bus stop and a corresponding stop line based on the opening metadata of the electronic map;

step S13) taking the entrance and exit of the rail transit station as round points, and using GIS software to make a buffer area with the radius of 100 m;

step S14) utilizing GIS software to intersect the buffer area and the ground bus stop to obtain the bus stop contained in the radius range of 100 meters of the straight line of the track traffic entrance and exit;

step S15) based on the opening metadata of the electronic map, taking the entrance and the exit of the rail transit station as the starting point, and acquiring the corresponding bus station in the step S14Planning walking path with the point as the terminal point, calculating walking distance and walking time consumption to obtain walking connection distance L of station i_{Walking connection i}And the time consumption T for walking connection_{Walking connection i}。

3. The evaluation method according to claim 2, wherein in the step S1, the evaluating the facility fusion level includes the steps of:

step S16) defining the facility fusion of the bus stop i and the rail transit: s_{Facility i}=100-（L_{Walking connection i}/L_{Straight distance i}-1）×100；

Step S17) defines a facility fusion level: s_Facility=(S_{Facility 1}+ S_{Facility 2}+…+ S_{Facility n}) And/n, wherein n is a natural number greater than 0.

4. The evaluation method according to claim 2, wherein in the step S2, calculating the waiting time for the average transfer includes the steps of:

step S21), calculating transfer time consumption including passenger outbound time consumption and time consumption of walking connection to a corresponding bus stop at an outbound port:

T_{transfer i}=T_{Go out of station}+T_{Walking connection i}

In the above formula, T_{Transfer i}Total time consumption for transfer with bus station i, T_{Go out of station}For average outbound time consumption, T_{Walking connection i}The time consumption for walking connection;

step S22) calculates the average transfer waiting time:

T_{transfer waiting i}=T_{Bus j}-（T_{Track i + T transfer i}) Wherein, T_{Bus j}=min{T_{The bus 1 is a public transport vehicle,}T_{the number of buses 2, …,}T_{bus n}And (c) the step of (c) in which,

T_{bus j}-（T_{Track i + T transfer i}）>0

In the above formula, T_{Transfer waiting i}Transfer waiting time T consumed for transferring the ground buses for the ith track traffic_{Bus j}For later than the rail-to-ith shift operating timeT_{Track i}And T_{Transfer i}The minimum value of the bus operating time of the sum;

T_{average transfer wait}=average（T_{The transfer is waiting for 1 and the transfer is waiting,}T_{transfer waiting 2, …}T_{Transfer waiting n}) Wherein n is a natural number greater than 0.

5. The evaluation method according to claim 4, wherein in the step S2, the operation fusion level evaluation includes the steps of:

comparing the average transfer waiting time with the acceptable waiting time, and setting the evaluation operation fusion level as

S_Operation=100-（T_{Average transfer wait}/T_{Experience transfer wait}-1）×100；

In the above formula, T_{Average transfer wait}Average transfer latency time, T, calculated in step (b) for average transfer latency time_{Experience transfer wait}And obtaining an experience value by urban bus satisfaction survey.

6. The evaluation method according to claim 1, wherein in the step S3, the passenger flow fusion evaluation includes the steps of:

step S31) setting station S_{Passenger flow i}=C_{Transfer i/C i}×100

In the above formula, S_{Passenger flow i}Level of fusion of passenger flows for site i, C_{Transfer i}Passenger flow for rail traffic at station i, C_iThe bus passenger flow is station i;

step S32) sets the fusion level S_{Passenger flow}=（S_{Passenger flow 1}+S_{Passenger flow 2}+…+S_{Passenger flow n}) And/n, wherein n is a natural number greater than 0.

7. The evaluation method according to claim 1, wherein in the step S4, establishing the urban rail transit and public transportation integrated evaluation model comprises the following steps:

step S41) urban rail transit and public transport two-network fusion level S_{Two-network convergence}=A₁×S_Facility+A₂×S_Operation+A₃×S_{Passenger flow}，

In the above formula, S_FacilityFor facility fusion level evaluation, S_OperationFor operational fusion level evaluation, S_{Passenger flow}For evaluation of the level of fusion of passenger flow, A₁Weight for facility fusion level evaluation, A₂Weight for operation fusion level evaluation, A₃Evaluating the weight for the passenger flow fusion level;

step S42) determining weight A in the urban rail transit and public transport two-network fusion level evaluation model through an analytic hierarchy process₁、A₂、A₃；

Step S43) establishing an urban rail transit and public transport two-network fusion level evaluation model.

8. The evaluation method according to claim 7, wherein in the step S42, the determining of the weight by the analytic hierarchy process comprises the steps of:

step S421) constructing a judgment matrix for pairwise comparison between indexes to obtain the relative importance of a certain index, and constructing the judgment matrix (a) by adopting a 1-9-level scale method_ij)_3×3Element a in the matrix_ijRepresents element A_iRelative to A_jDegree of importance of, the decision matrix (a)_ij)_3×3In (a)_ij>0，a_ji=1/a_ij，a_ii=1, wherein i and j are both natural numbers of 1-3;

step S422) single criterion sorting, for a judgment matrix, obtaining a weight vector through column normalization → a sum method → a row rule I, and calculating to obtain a maximum eigenvalue by combining the judgment matrix, namely calculating an eigenvalue root lambda max and an eigenvector W which meet AW = lambda maxW, wherein W is a normalized eigenvector corresponding to the lambda max;

step 423) using the CR index to judge, when CR is less than 0.1, the consistency of the judgment matrix is considered to be acceptable, and when CR is more than 0.1, the judgment matrix is considered not to meet the consistency requirement, and the judgment matrix is revised again.

Images