JPH07285440A - Evaluating method for program correcting plan - Google Patents

Abstract

PURPOSE:To improve operability of a program correcting system by evaluating an execution effect of a correcting plan in a mover motion program of train diagram or the like, and visualizing an evaluation result, so as to support a proposal, whether applied or not, and judging selection by a command person. CONSTITUTION:In a diagram control part 11, based oh an operation record of a train periodically fed through a communication cable 7 from equipment 1, a record diagram 22 is created. In a proposal inference part 12, operation of a train is estimated relating to disorder of a diagram, and an estimated diagram 23 is drawn to prepare a proposal diagram 24 for restoring the diagram. In a proposal estimating part 13, operation estimating simulation of a proposal is performed to draw a proposal estimation diagram 25. In a proposal evaluating part 14, in accordance with an evaluation index 26, the proposal estimation diagram 25 is analyzed and evaluated, to prepare a proposal evaluation data 27, and in a display part 16, the evaluation data 27 is used, to display an execution effect in a proposal evaluation drawing by a multidimensional graph (time, station, evaluation amount).

Description

Detailed Description of the Invention

[0001]

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION 1. Field of the Invention The present invention relates to a plan amendment plan evaluation method for trains, buses, aircrafts, etc., for a plan amendment plan prepared by a system or a human, and evaluating the amendment plan or a plurality of amendments The present invention relates to a method of evaluating a plan amendment that makes it possible to make a quick decision by visualizing the comparative evaluation of.

[0002]

2. Description of the Related Art On commuting routes in the suburbs of large cities, the disorder of train schedules and the congestion of trains during rush hours in the morning and evening have become major social problems. Train diamonds tend to be highly densified in order to improve transportation capacity and reduce congestion, which causes a reduction in recovery from the disorder of the train. From such a background, in order to accurately and promptly respond to the disturbance of train operation, an operation management system that collectively manages train tracking information and route control information at each station at a central command center has spread,
In recent years, there has also appeared a vehicle equipped with a traffic rescheduling function that supports traffic rescheduling work.

[0003] However, the conventional traffic rescheduling system is "Expert system for train rescheduling" by Komatani and Fukuda.
(Journal of the Japanese Society for Artificial Intelligence Vol.3 No.1 pp26 to pp31, January 1988)
As described, the evaluation of the rearrangement plan made by the system or the dispatcher displays the estimated timetable (recovery prediction timetable) when the rearrangement plan is executed on the train diagram in a streak format, and the maximum delay amount and delay. We compare several types of numerical data, such as the number of trains, and evaluate the operation of the trains with and without rearrangement. Therefore, if the content of the proposal is complicated or there are alternatives, there will be more places to rely on the empirical judgment of the dispatcher,
The load on the dispatcher who evaluates and selects the draft plan was increasing.

[0004]

In the conventional traffic rescheduling system, the contents of the rescheduling plan after the system or a person has created the rescheduling plan, a prediction diagram when the rescheduling plan is executed, and a case where the rescheduling is carried out Numerical data on the total delay time of trains and the number of delayed trains were compared and displayed to determine whether to adopt the rearrangement plan. However, if there are many train types that are overtaking or if the train schedule is greatly disturbed, the proposal contents will be complicated, so an appropriate sorting judgment that comprehensively grasps the entire line district within a limited time is made. It was difficult to do. Therefore, the evaluation method that can intuitively understand the implementation effect of the rescheduling plan and the interface that supports the judgment of the dispatcher became a subject.

The object of the present invention is to provide an evaluation method that allows the user to intuitively understand the effect of implementing a plan revision plan over the entire route.
It is to support the decision-making / decision-making of the proposal by the dispatcher, reduce the load on the dispatcher and improve the operability of the plan correction system.

[0006]

[Means for Solving the Problems] For a plurality of revision plans of the operation plan prepared by the system or the dispatcher, an operation prediction simulation is carried out with and without the respective proposals, and the results are shown. Evaluation is made using evaluation indicators such as "delay amount" and "operation interval", and the effect of each plan on the entire line is visualized until a certain time ahead.

Specifically, the X-axis (time) on the diagram is divided into each time zone, and the Y-axis (position of the moving body) is divided into each station, and the diagram is divided into a grid pattern of the number of time zones × the number of stations. To do. Therefore, the evaluation data is calculated for each of a total of n × m grids divided by n stations and m time zones. Each of the divided evaluation areas is A (X _n , Y _m ), the evaluation point at which a certain moving body passes the station s at time t is P (t, s), and the evaluation point P (t, s) is evaluated. Area A (X _n , Y _m )
, The evaluation calculation result at the evaluation point P (t, s) is used as the evaluation data of the evaluation area A (X _n , Y _m ). The evaluation calculation is performed for the "delay amount" when observing the train operation plan and for the "driving interval" for passenger convenience, and the evaluation data obtained by the evaluation calculation is set for all evaluation areas. , A time axis on the X axis, a position (station) on the Y axis, and evaluation data on the Z axis are created.

In general, since there is a time lag in the operation prediction of each train depending on whether or not the rearrangement is performed, the evaluation point P that specifies the Z axis evaluation data also moves depending on whether or not the rearrangement is performed or an alternative plan. Therefore, in order to compare the evaluation results with other proposals (alternatives) and the case where the proposals are not implemented by the multidimensional graph, the evaluation data is complemented in all the evaluation areas. By doing this, it is possible to compare and evaluate multiple proposals by comparing the evaluation data for each proposal area with or without multiple proposals and displaying the difference in a multidimensional graph. .

[0009]

According to the present invention, with respect to a plurality of revision plans of the operation plan, the operation when each proposal is implemented is predicted until a certain time, and the result is evaluated / visualized under each evaluation index. Therefore, it is possible to intuitively judge the influence of the proposal on the operation status. When the delay amount is selected as the evaluation index, it is possible to quickly select proposals that are excellent in eliminating delays early, and when operating intervals are selected as the evaluation index, it is possible to quickly select proposals that are excellent in customer service. You can do it. You can also display the evaluation results of each proposal at the same time using a multi-window,
When the proposal is not implemented or by displaying the result of comparison with the alternative plan, the evaluation plan can be easily evaluated from multiple angles.

As a result, the orderer's judgment when executing the proposal becomes more accurate, errors such as discarding necessary proposals and approving unnecessary proposals are reduced, and the quality of operation rescheduling is improved. The load on the dispatcher is reduced.

[0011]

EXAMPLES Examples of the present invention will be described below.

FIG. 1 is an overall configuration diagram of an operation control system for formulating a recovery plan when a train operation plan is disturbed. The central processing unit 1 is composed of a diagram management unit 11, a proposal inference unit 12, a proposal prediction unit 13, a proposal evaluation unit 14, a man-machine dialogue unit 15, and a display unit 16. Diamond management unit 1
1 creates a track record 22 based on the track record of trains periodically sent from the equipment 1 via the communication cable 7,
When the operation plan is changed, the plan timetable 21 is updated. The proposal inference unit predicts the train operation with respect to the disorder of the schedule, creates the prediction schedule 23, and uses the result to create the proposal schedule 24 for recovering the schedule.
The proposal prediction unit uses the proposal timetable and the actual timetable to perform a train operation prediction simulation when the proposal timetable is implemented, and creates a proposal prediction timetable 25. The proposal evaluation unit evaluates the proposal prediction diagram according to the proposal evaluation index 26 and creates evaluation data 27. The man-machine dialogue unit accepts various requests from the ordering staff 5 using the mouse 4 or the like. The display unit creates the proposed evaluation diagram 32 using the evaluation data.

The storage device 2 stores a plan diagram 21 for storing daily operation plans, a result diagram for storing operation results up to the current time, and a forecast diagram for storing prediction results when trains are operated according to the plan diagram. Proposal diagram that stores the correction plan of the schedule, Proposal forecast diagram that stores the prediction result when the train operates according to the proposal diagram, Proposal evaluation index that becomes the evaluation index when evaluating the rearrangement plan, Evaluation result of the proposal prediction diagram Is stored in the evaluation data.

The display device 3 is composed of a diagram 31 for displaying various diagrams such as a plan diagram and an actual diagram, and a proposed evaluation diagram 32 in which evaluation data as evaluation results of the proposed prediction diagram are visualized in a multidimensional graph.

Next, the processing of each part of the central processing unit will be described. The timetable management unit updates the actual timetable based on the operational results of all trains that are periodically sent from the equipment 6. In addition, the plan diagram is updated when the plan diagram is changed. The proposal reasoning unit periodically monitors the actual timetable, and when a problematic timetable disorder is detected, creates a prediction timetable, and based on the result, formulates a recovery plan and creates a suggested timetable. .
The proposal prediction unit creates a proposal prediction diagram by performing an operation prediction simulation when the recovery plan proposed by the system or the dispatcher is executed.

FIG. 2 is a display example of an operation record diagram and a proposed forecast diagram. The horizontal axis 2010 represents time, the vertical axis 2020 represents a station, and the vertical line 2050 represents current time. The diagonal solid line 2040 represents the train operation record (actual record),
A broken line streak 2050 represents an operation prediction (proposed prediction diagram). When the commander picks the evaluation menu 2060 to request the evaluation of the proposal content while the proposal prediction diagram is displayed, the proposal evaluation unit is activated.

FIG. 3 is an overall processing flow chart of the proposal evaluation section for creating evaluation data using the proposal prediction diagram based on the proposal evaluation index. A proposal evaluation index is input in block 3010, and a proposal evaluation index is determined in block 3020. When the proposed evaluation index is “delay amount”, the evaluation calculation of the delay amount is performed using the proposed prediction diagram in block 3030 to create evaluation data. On the other hand, when the proposed evaluation index is "driving interval", in block 3040, the proposed prediction timetable is used for the evaluation calculation of the driving interval.

FIG. 4 is a detailed processing flowchart of the delay amount evaluation 3030 of FIG. In block 4010, the current time is set as the evaluation time, and in block 4020 the evaluation time is added by a fixed amount of time. In block 4030, the evaluation direction is changed, and in block 4040, the evaluation station is changed.
In block 4050, a train existing in the evaluation area (evaluation time zone, evaluation station) is searched from the proposal prediction diagram. Block 4060 if there is a train in the evaluation area
Check how many sampling points there are (sampling case). If there is no train, block 4090 sets null (NULL) in the evaluation data.

FIG. 5 shows an example of the sampling case. The vertical line 5010 represents the current evaluation start time t, and the vertical line 5020 represents the evaluation start time (t + α) of the next cycle. Also the horizontal line 50
Reference numeral 30 represents an evaluation station, and hatched area 5050 represents an evaluation area. Further, points 5060 and 5070 represent sampling points. Case (1) is a case where one sampling point exists in the evaluation area, and cases (2) and (3) are cases where two or more sampling points exist in the evaluation area. Further, the case (4) is a case where there are no sampling points in the evaluation area. In the case of case (1), the delay amount evaluation calculation is performed in block 3070 (in this case, the estimated delay amount of the train at the evaluation point 5060).
And set the result in the evaluation data. Further, when there are a plurality of sampling points as in cases (2) and (3), the average value of the evaluation calculation results at each point is similarly set. On the other hand, if there is no sampling point as in case (4), block 3080 is NUL.
Set L. These processes are repeated to set the evaluation data corresponding to all the evaluation areas. here,
Although the description has been given in the case where the proposed evaluation index is the delay amount, the same applies when the proposed evaluation index is the driving interval.

FIG. 6 is an example of evaluation data set by the delay amount evaluation processing, and the data structure is a two-dimensional array of the number of stations and the number of time divisions. Each array element corresponds to one evaluation area, and evaluation data of each evaluation area is stored. Moreover, although NULL is set in the place where the evaluation data does not exist, if NULL is left, not only the processing of the display unit for visualizing the evaluation data becomes complicated, but also other proposals are made. Since it becomes difficult to compare the evaluation data with the
In block 3050 of FIG. 3, a complement process of the evaluation data is performed.

FIG. 7 is an example of the data complementing process of the shaded portion of FIG. In this example, NU
Although it complements LL, more sophisticated interpolation methods can be applied. When all the nulls are complemented, the evaluation data of FIG. 6 (before the complement) becomes the evaluation data of FIG. 8 (after the complement).
Is converted to.

FIG. 9 is a three-dimensional graph of the evaluation data of the delay amount, and shows the result of predicting the temporal transition of the delay condition of the train when the recovery plan is implemented. This allows
The train operation forecast for the entire line area when the proposal is implemented can be grasped comprehensively.

FIG. 10 is a graph showing the difference in the delay amount evaluation data between the case where the reduction plan is executed and the case where the reduction plan is not executed, and shows that the delay is recovered in the entire evaluation area by the execution of the reduction plan. ing. By using this graph, it is possible to easily confirm the effectiveness of the arrangement plan.

FIG. 11 is a graph in which the delay amount evaluation data of two types of proposals are compared and the difference between the evaluation data is graphed. By using this graph, it is possible to intuitively judge the superiority or inferiority of a plurality of proposals.

FIG. 12 shows comparison and display of evaluation graphs of a plurality of proposals on the screen of the display device 3 simultaneously using a multi-window. This makes it possible to comprehensively judge the superiority and inferiority of a plurality of proposals from various angles.

[0026]

The present invention has the following effects. (1) In order to evaluate the proposal more intuitively by visualizing the result of the proposal evaluation according to the request of the orderer,
This makes it easier for the ordering staff to decide whether to accept the proposal, and the ordering load is reduced. (2) Since the operation when the proposal is implemented can be predicted and the validity of the proposal can be confirmed, it is possible to prevent operational mistakes such as erroneous input of the proposal. (3) The quality of the proposal can be expected to be improved because the comparison and judgment of a plurality of arrangement plans can be made quickly and easily.

[Brief description of drawings]

FIG. 1 is a block diagram of a traffic control system.

FIG. 2 is an explanatory diagram of a proposed prediction diagram display.

FIG. 3 is an overall processing flowchart of a proposal evaluation unit.

FIG. 4 is a flowchart of delay amount evaluation processing.

FIG. 5 is an explanatory diagram of an example of a sampling case.

FIG. 6 is an explanatory diagram of delay amount evaluation data (uplink / before complement).

FIG. 7 is an explanatory diagram of an example of data complementing processing.

FIG. 8 is an explanatory diagram of delay amount evaluation data (uplink / after complement).

FIG. 9 is an explanatory diagram of a three-dimensional display result of delay amount evaluation data.

FIG. 10 is an explanatory diagram for confirming the effect of the proposal by comparison with the time when the proposal is not implemented.

FIG. 11 is an explanatory diagram of superiority / inferiority judgment of a proposal by comparison with execution of an alternative plan.

FIG. 12 is an explanatory diagram of a comprehensive judgment of a proposed superiority and inferiority using a multi-window.

[Explanation of symbols]

1 ... Central processing unit, 2 ... Storage device, 3 ... Display device, 4 ...
Mouse, 5 ... commander, 6 ... equipment.

Claims (11)

[Claims] 1. A system for correcting an operation plan of a mobile body, in which a human evaluates the proposal content and approves / disapproves the proposal in response to a plan modification plan prepared by the system or by the human in order to recover the disorder of the operation plan. In the case of making the above judgment, the operation prediction of each mobile body when the proposal is approved and the plan is corrected is performed, and the evaluation point is set on the field where the time is the X axis and the position of each mobile body is the Y axis. An evaluation method of a plan amendment characterized by sampling, and visualizing an evaluation result of a recovery plan by multi-dimensionally graphing the result of the evaluation operation at each sampling point with the Z axis. 2. The X-axis time is divided into each time zone, and the Y-axis moving body position is divided into each station.
An evaluation method of a plan revision plan in which the field is divided into a grid shape of the number of time zones × the number of stations, and the evaluation data is calculated for each of n stations and a total of n × m grids divided in m time zones. . 3. The XY on the diagram according to claim 1.
An evaluation method of a plan revision plan in which all trains existing in the field are stopped, started, or passed through at all stations. 4. The method according to claim 1 or 2, wherein each evaluation area divided into n × m pieces is A (X _n , Y _m ), and an operation prediction of a certain moving body passes through a station s at time t. , The evaluation point is represented by P (t, s), and when the evaluation point P (t, s) is included in the evaluation area (X _n , Y _m ), the evaluation point P
The evaluation calculation result at (t, s) is displayed in the evaluation area A.
An evaluation method of a plan revision plan which is used as evaluation data of (X _n , Y _m ). 5. The evaluation area A (X _n , Y _m ) according to claim 1, 2 or 4, when there is no predicted passage point of the moving object in the evaluation area A (X _n , Y _m ), and evaluation data cannot be set, an adjacent evaluation area is set. An evaluation method of a plan revision plan that complements the data using the evaluation data of and sets the evaluation data in all evaluation areas. 6. The method according to claim 1, 2 or 4, wherein there are a plurality of predicted passage points of the moving body in the evaluation area A (X _n , Y _m ), and a plurality of sampling points are present in one evaluation area. Is an evaluation method of a plan revision plan in which the calculation results of evaluation data at each sampling point are averaged and one evaluation data is set in one evaluation area. 7. The plan amendment plan according to claim 1, wherein the difference between the operation forecast when the plan is not changed and the operation forecast due to the plan amendment is used as the evaluation data to visualize the forecast effect of the plan amendment plan. Evaluation methods. 8. The method for evaluating a plan amendment according to claim 1, wherein the operation status up to the current time is visualized by using the difference between the operation record data up to the current time and the plan as the evaluation data. 9. The plan modification according to claim 1, wherein when there are a plurality of plan modification proposals, the difference between the operation forecasts by the individual proposals is used as the evaluation data to visualize the comparison result of superiority and inferiority of the plan modification proposals. Evaluation method of the plan. 10. A plan amendment plan for visualizing an evaluation result of a plan amendment plan in a specified direction when an operation direction of a moving body is designated in claim 1 by performing an evaluation calculation from data only in the specified direction of travel. Evaluation methods. 11. The method for evaluating a plan amendment according to claim 1, wherein a plurality of evaluation diagrams are simultaneously displayed using a multi-window.