Share / Export Citation / Email / Print / Text size:

Transport Problems

Silesian University of Technology

Subject: Economics, Transportation, Transportation Science & Technology


eISSN: 2300-861X



VOLUME 15 , ISSUE 4, Part 2 (December 2020) > List of articles



Keywords : RoadLoad application; Dijkstra's algorithm; transport geography; modes of transport; spatial mobility; transport accessibility

Citation Information : Transport Problems. Volume 15, Issue 4, Part 2, Pages 227-240, DOI:

License : (CC BY 4.0)

Received Date : 28-April-2019 / Accepted: 07-December-2020 / Published Online: 31-December-2020



The purpose of this article is to present the authors' own software for predicting changes in the density and directions of traffic flows and to compare overall results of research on transport accessibility with the results returned in the study of transport accessibility conducted with the software (isochronic accessibility). Developed for research purposes, the authors' application is based on Dijkstra's algorithm, which is classified as one of the greedy ones and does not always return optimum results, even though it is considered to be generally accurate. In the course of the research, it was stated that the implementation of Dijkstra's algorithm in the RoadLoad tool is suitable for studying and prognosing phenomena, under the assumption that there are detailed data on the point of departure and destination for each trip. The tool enables us to research a spatial (cumulated values of network load) as well as time-spatial (network load at virtually any time) dimension of the phenomenon. It cannot be applied, however, without the knowledge of the transport behavior characteristics of the users of the road system.

Content not available PDF Share



1. Adey, P. If mobility is everything then it is nothing: Towards a relational politics of (im)mobilities. Mobilities. 2006. Vol. 1(1). P. 75-94.

2. Akcelik, R. Highway Capacity Manual Delay Formula for Signalized Intersections. ITE Journal. 1988. Vol. 58(3). P. 23-27.

3. Bartosiewicz, B. & Pielesiak, I. Dzienna mobilność mieszkańców małych miast Łódzkiego Obszaru Metropolitalnego. Prace Naukowe Uniwersytetu Ekonomicznego we Wrocławiu. 2014. Vol. 367. P. 21-29. [In Polish: Daily mobility of small town’s inhabitants in Łódź Metropolitan Area].

4. Bartosiewicz, B. & Pielesiak, I. Powiązania transportowe w Łódzkim Obszarze Metropolitalnym. Studia KPZK PAN. 2012. Vol. 147. P. 105-137. [In Polish: Transportation Linkages in Lodz Metropolitan Area].

5. Bateman, I.J. & Garrod, G.D. & Brainard, J.S. & Lovett, A.A. Measurement issues in the travel cost method: a geographical information systems approach. Journal of Agricultural Economics. 1996. Vol. 47(1-4). P. 191-205.

6. Beirão, G. & Cabral, J.S. Understanding attitudes towards public transport and private car: A qualitative study. Transport Policy. 2007. Vol. 14(6). P. 478-489.

7. Bergson, H. Creative Evolution. New York: H. Holt and Co. 1911.

8. Bertalanffy, L.V. Ogólna teoria systemów - podstawy, rozwój, zastosowania. Warsaw: Państwowe Wydawnictwo Naukowe. 1984. [In Polish: General system theory - basics, development, applications].

9. Black, J. & Conroy, M. Accessibility Measures and the Social Evaluation of Urban Structure. Environment and Planning A. 1977. Vol. 9(9). P. 1013-1031.

10. Borowska-Stefańska, M. & Domagalski, A. & Wiśniewski, S. Changes Concerning Commute Traffic Distribution on a Road Network Following the Occurrence of a Natural Disaster – the Example of a Flood in the Mazovian Voivodeship (Eastern Poland). Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment. 2018. Vol. 65. P. 116-137.

11. Borowska-Stefańska, M. & Kowalski, M. & Wiśniewski, S. Changes in travel time and the load of road network, depending on the diversification of working hours: case study the Łódź Voivodeship. Poland. Geografie. 2020. Vol. 125(2). P. 211-241.

12. Bruinsma, F. & Rietveld, P. The accessibility of European cities: theoretical framework and comparison of approaches. Environment and Planning A. 1998. Vol. 30(3). P. 499-521.

13. Cauvin, C. A systemic approach to transport accessibility. A methodology developed in Strasbourg: 1982-2002. Cybergeo: European Journal of Geography. 2005.

14. Chen, Z. & Liu, X. C. & Zhang, G. Non-recurrent congestion analysis using data-driven spatiotemporal approach for information construction. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies. 2016. Vol. 71. P. 19-31.

15. Chung, Y. Assessment of non-recurrent congestion caused by precipitation using archived weather and traffic flow data. Transport Policy. 2012. Vol. 19(1). P. 167-173.

16. Cresswell, T. & Mobilities, I: Catching up. Progress in Human Geography. 2011. Vol. 35(4). P. 550-558.

17. Deleuze, G. Bergsonizm. New York: Zone Books. 1991.

18. Dijkstra, E.W. A note on two problems in connexion with graphs. Numerische Mathematik. 1959. Vol. 1(1). P. 269-271.

19. Fellendorf, M. & Nokel, K. & Handke, N. VISUM-online-traffic management for the EXPO 2000 based on a traffic model. In Proceedings of the 7th World Congress on Intelligent Systems. Turin - Italy. 2000.

20. Gärling, T. & Schuitema, G. Travel demand management targeting reduced private car use: effectiveness, public acceptability and political feasibility. Journal of Social Issues. 2007. Vol. 63(1). P. 139-153.

21. Gould, P.R. Spatial Diffusion. Washington D.C. Association of American Geographers. 1969.

22. Handy, S.L. & Niemeier, D.A. Measuring Accessibility: An Exploration of Issues and Alternatives. Environment and Planning A. 1997. Vol. 29(7). P. 1175-1194.

23. Hannam, K. & Sheller, M., & Urry, J. Editorial: Mobilities, immobilities and moorings. Mobilities. 2006. Vol. 1(1). P. 1-22.

24. Hansen, W.G. How accessibility shapes land use. Journal of the American Institute of planners. 1959. Vol. 25(2). P. 73-76.

25. Ingram, D.R. The concept of accessibility: a search for an operational form. Regional studies. 1971. Vol. 5(2). P. 101-107.

26. Jasika, N. & Alispahic, N., & Elma, A., & Ilvana, K. Dijkstra’s shortest path algorithm serial and parallel execution performance analysis. In: 2012 Proceedings of the 35th International Convention. Opatija. 2012.

27. Jirón, P. Mobility on the Move: Examining Urban Daily Mobility Practices in Santiago de Chile. PhD diss.. London School of Economics and Political Science. 2008.

28. Karoń, G. Modelowanie popytu oparte na podróżach pojedynczych. Logistyka. 2012. Vol. 4. P. 323-342. [In Polish: Trip-based travel-demand modeling].

29. Kaufmann, V. & Bergman, M.M. & Joye, D. Motility: mobility as capital. International journal of urban and regional research. 2004. Vol. 28(4). P. 745-756.

30. Komornicki, T. & Śleszyński, P. & Rosik, P. & Pomianowski, W. Dostępność przestrzenna jako przesłanka kształtowania polskiej polityki transportowej. Warszawa: KPZK PAN. 2009. [In Polish: Spatial accessibility as a premise for Polish transport Policy].

31. Konarski, A. Wykorzystanie skryptów w programie VISUM, na przykładzie modelu ruchu województwa śląskiego. Zeszyty Naukowo-Techniczne Stowarzyszenia Inżynierów i Techników Komunikacji w Krakowie. Seria: Materiały Konferencyjne. 2014. Vol. 1(103). P. 195-203. [In Polish: The use of scripts in the VISUM program, on the example of the Silesian Voivodeship traffic model].

32. Kraft, S. Daily spatial mobility and transport behaviour in the Czech Republic: pilot study in the Písek and Bystrice and Pernstejnem regions. Human Geographies - Journal of Studies and Research in Human Geography. 2014. Vol. 8(2). P. 51-67.

33. Kwan, M.P. & Weber, J. Scale and accessibility: Implications for the analysis of land use – travel interaction. Applied Geography. 2008. Vol. 28(2). P. 110-123.

34. Li, J. & Yu, L. A Visum-based method for determining road network capacity. Urban Transport of China. 2006. Vol. 4(2). P. 68-73.

35. Linneker, B. & Spence, N. Road transport infrastructure and regional economic development: The regional development effects of the M25 London orbital motorway. Journal of Transport Geography. 1996. Vol. 4(2). P. 77-92.

36. Loukopoulos, P. A classification of travel demand management measures. In Threats from Car Traffic to the Quality of Urban Life: Problems, Causes and Solutions, edited by Gärling T. & Steg, L. P. 275-292. Amsterdam: Elsevier. 2007.

37. Loukopoulos, P. & Jakobsson, C. & Gärling, T. & Meland, S. & Fujii, S. Choices of activity - and travel - change options. In: Progress in activity-based analysis, edited by Timmermans H.P.J. Amsterdam: Elseiver. 2005. P. 489-501.

38. Martellato, D. & Nijkamp, P. & Reggiani, A. Measurement and measures of network accessibility: economic perspectives. in Transport networks in Europe: concepts, analysis, and policies. Edited by Button, W. & Nijkamp, P. & Priemus, H. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar. 1998. P. 161-180.

39. Nutley, S. & Thomas, C. Spatial mobility and social change: the mobile and the immobile. Sociologia Ruralis. 1995. Vol. 35(1). P. 24-39.

40. Pu, Y. & Yang, C. & Liu, H. & Chen, Z. & Chen, A. Impact of license plate restriction policy on emission reduction in Hangzhou using a bottom-up approach. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment. 2015. Vol. 34. P. 281-292.

41. Redman, L. & Friman, M. & Gärling, T. & Hartig, T. Quality attributes of public transport that attract car users: A research review. Transport Policy. 2013. Vol. 25. P. 119-127.

42. Rosik, P. Dostępność lądowa przestrzeni Polski w wymiarze europejskim. Warsaw: IGiPZ PAN 2012. [In Polish: Surface accessibility of the space of Poland in the European dimension].

43. Schuitema, G. & Steg, L. & Forward, S. Explaining differences in acceptability before and acceptance after the implementation of a congestion charge in Stockholm. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice. 2010. Vol. 44(2). P. 99-109.

44. Skabardonis, A. & Varaiya, P. & Petty, K. Measuring recurrent and nonrecurrent traffic congestion. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board. 2003. Vol. 1856(1). P. 118-124.

45. Śleszyński, P. Dostępność czasowa i jej zastosowania. Przegląd Geograficzny. 2014. Vol. 86(2). P. 171-215. [In Polish: Emporal accessibility and its applications].

46. Small, K.A. & Gómez-Ibáñez, J.A. Road pricing for congestion management: the transition from theory to policy. In: Road pricing, traffic congestion and the environment: issues of efficiency and social feasibility. Edited by Button, K.J. & Verhoef, E.T. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar. 1997. P. 213-246.

47. Steg, L. Can public transport compete with the private car? IATSS Research. 2003. Vol. 27(2). P. 27-35.

48. Stępniak, M. Wykorzystanie metody 2SFCA w badaniach dostępności przestrzennej usług medycznych. Przegląd Geograficzny. 2013. Vol. 85(2). P. 199-218. [In Polish: The application of the two-step floating catchment area method to studies of accessibility of healthcare services].

49. Stępniak, M. & Jacobs-Crisioni, C. Reducing the uncertainty induced by spatial aggregation in accessibility and spatial interaction applications. Journal of Transport Geography. 2017. Vol. 61. P. 17-29.

50. Stępniak, M. & Rosik, P. Accessibility of Services of General Interest at regional scale. Europa XXI. 2013. Vol. 23. P. 131-147.

51. Szołtysek, J. Kreowanie mobilności mieszkańców miast. Warszawa: Wolters Kluwer. 2011. [In Polish: Creating mobility of city dwellers].

52. Tarapata, Z. & Mierzejewski, K. Prognozowanie i symulacja skutków wystąpienia zagrożeń systemu komunikacyjnego aglomeracji. Symulacja w badaniach i rozwoju. 2010. Vol. 1(1). P. 93-106. [In Polish: Effects prediction and simulation of threats occurrences in agglomeration transportation system].

53. Taylor, Z. Przestrzenna dostępność miejsc zatrudnienia, kształcenia i usług a codzienna ruchliwość ludności wiejskiej. Wrocław: Continuo. 1999. [In Polish: Accessibility to facilities versus daily mobility of rural dwellers].

54. Vickerman, R.W. Accessibility, attraction, and potential: a review of some concepts and their use in determining mobility. Environment and Planning A. 1974. Vol. 6(6). P. 675-691.

55. von Schwarz-Geschka, M. & Geschka, H. & Hahnenwald, H. Die Szenariotechnik am Beispiel des Projektes "Zukunft der Mobilität". In: Logistik der Zukunft. Edited by Göpfert, I. 2016. Wiesbaden: Springer Gabler. P. 363-386.

56. Wiśniewski, S. Przestrzenne zróżnicowanie potencjalnej dostępności głównych węzłów sieci drogowej województwa łódzkiego. Prace Geograficzne. 2016. Vol. 144. P. 91-104. [In Polish: Spatial differentiation of the potential accessibility of the main road network nodes of the Lodzkie Voivodship].

57. Wiśniewski, S. Zróżnicowanie dostępności transportowej miast w województwie łódzkim. Łódź: UŁ. 2015a. [In Polish: Differentiation of transport accessibility of cities in the Lodz voivodeship].

58. Wiśniewski, S. Dostępność czasowa Uniejowa w kontekście indywidualnego transportu samochodowego. Biuletyn Uniejowski. 2015. Vol. 4. P. 167-179. [In Polish: Time accessibility of Uniejów in individual car transport].

59. Żochowska, R. & Karoń, G. Przegląd literatury na temat zjawiska kongestii i zakłóceń ruchu w systemie transportowym miasta w aspekcie modelowania podróży. Zeszyty Naukowo-Techniczne Stowarzyszenia Inżynierów i Techników Komunikacji w Krakowie. Seria: Materiały Konferencyjne. 2012. Vol. 98(2). P. 252-276. [In Polish: Review of literature on congestion effect and traffic disturbances in urban transportation system in the aspect of travel modeling].