Proceedings of the 20th Conference on Computer Science and Intelligence Systems (FedCSIS)

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.15439/2025F9112

Citation: Proceedings of the 20th Conference on Computer Science and Intelligence Systems (FedCSIS), M. Bolanowski, M. Ganzha, L. Maciaszek, M. Paprzycki, D. Ślęzak (eds). ACSIS, Vol. 43, pages 727–732 (2025)

Full text

Abstract. The demand for sustainable railway Transportation is increasing over time. At the same time, the capacity of Railway networks is limited. Hence, efficient algorithms for generating optimal timetables are of great interest. Previous research focuses on trains being separated by classical fixed block signaling systems. With modern control systems based on moving block, e.g., within the European Train Control System (ETCS), the principles of safely separating trains change significantly. Only limited research on optimal routing on such modern railway networks exists. With this work, we propose a simulation approach tailored to be used with heuristic optimization algorithms to tackle this problem. Moreover, we show how such a framework can allow for more general inputs to jointly optimize what is usually planned sequentially as of today. The simulation framework is included within the open-source Munich Train Control Toolkit (MTCT) available on GitHub at https://github.com/cda-tum/mtct.

References

1. European Commission and Directorate-General for Mobility and Transport, Transport in the European Union: Current trends and issues. Publications Office of the European Union, 2024. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.2832/131741
2. European Parliament, “Position of the European Parliament and of the Council on the use of railway infrastructure capacity in the single European railway area,” 2024, EP-PE_TC1-COD(2023)0271. [Online]. Available: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TC1-COD-2023-0271_EN.pdf
3. S. Engels, T. Peham, J. Przigoda, N. Przigoda, and R. Wille, “Design tasks and their complexity for the European Train Control System with hybrid train detection,” EURO Journal on Transportation and Logistics, vol. 14, p. 100161, 2025. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejtl.2025.100161
4. R. M. Lusby, J. Larsen, M. Ehrgott, and D. Ryan, “Railway track allocation: models and methods,” OR Spectrum, vol. 33, no. 4, pp. 843–883, dec 2009. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00291-009-0189-0
5. N. Absi, C. Archetti, S. Dauzère-Pérès, and D. Feillet, “A two-phase iterative heuristic approach for the production routing problem,” Transportation Science, vol. 49, no. 4, pp. 784–795, 2015. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1287/trsc.2014.0523
6. T. Schlechte, R. Borndörfer, J. Denißen, S. Heller, T. Klug, M. Küpper, N. Lindner, M. Reuther, A. Söhlke, and W. Steadman, “Timetable optimization for a moving block system,” Journal of Rail Transport Planning & Management, vol. 22, p. 100315, 2022. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrtpm.2022.100315
7. T. Klug, M. Reuther, and T. Schlechte, “Does laziness pay off? - a lazy-constraint approach to timetabling,” in 22nd Symposium on Algorithmic Approaches for Transportation Modelling, Optimization, and Systems (ATMOS 2022), vol. 106. Schloss Dagstuhl - Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik, 2022. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.4230/OASIcs.ATMOS.2022.11
8. S. Engels and R. Wille, “Comparing lazy constraint selection strategies in train routing with moving block control,” in Proceedings of the 19th Conference on Computer Science and Intelligence Systems (FedCSIS), vol. 39. Polish Information Processing Society, 2024, pp. 585–590. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.15439/2024f3041
9. Hürlimann, Daniel, “Objektorientierte Modellierung von Infrastrukturelementen und Betriebsvorgängen im Eisenbahnwesen,” Ph.D. dissertation, 2002. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.3929/ETHZ-A-004223151
10. OSRD contributors. Open source railway designer. [Online]. Available: https://osrd.fr
11. S. Canavan, D. J. Graham, P. C. Melo, R. J. Anderson, A. S. Barron, and J. M. Cohen, “Impacts of moving-block signaling on technical efficiency: Application of propensity score matching on urban metro rail systems,” Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, vol. 2534, no. 1, pp. 68–74, 2015. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.3141/2534-0
12. R. Luus, Direct Search Luus–Jaakola Optimization Procedure. Springer Nature Switzerland, 2024, pp. 1–5. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-54621-2_129-1
13. K. Nachtigall and S. Voget, “A genetic algorithm approach to periodic railway synchronization,” Computers & Operations Research, vol. 23, no. 5, pp. 453–463, 1996. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1016/0305-0548(95)00032-1
14. N. Bešinović, R. Goverde, G. Nicholson, and H. Steele, “Review of railway timetabling developments: planning phases, goals and future directions,” 2021. [Online]. Available: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/353378414_Review_of_railway_timetabling_developments_planning_phases_goals_and_future_directions
15. F. Hauck, “An overview and categorization of approaches for train timetable generation,” 2023. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.17169/REFUBIUM-37849
16. A. Mohammadi, H. Asadi, S. Mohamed, K. Nelson, and S. Nahavandi, “OpenGA, a C++ genetic algorithm library,” in 2017 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics (SMC). IEEE, 2017, pp. 2051–2056. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1109/smc.2017.8122921
17. S. Engels, T. Peham, and R. Wille, “A symbolic design method for ETCS Hybrid Level 3 at different degrees of accuracy,” in 23rd Symposium on Algorithmic Approaches for Transportation Modelling, Optimization, and Systems (ATMOS 2023), vol. 115. Schloss Dagstuhl - Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.4230/OASICS.ATMOS.2023.6