Coordinated Control Method of Bus Signal Priority and Speed Adjustment Based on Stop-Skipping

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Using a genetic algorithm, this study adressed the combinatorial optimization of bus siginal priority, speed adjustment, and stop-skipping. Improving the public transportation service is vital for a better urban transportation system, but the paper is poorly organized. Some figures lack proper explanation and are difficult to understand. Just one case study is insufficient to support the usefulness of the proposed method. I have the following specific concerns.

 

Major

1.      3.3 Calculation is based on just one objective function. Please discuss the validity of this function and possible alternatives. Various times can be weighted to compose the objective function, and such sensitivity tests should be conducted.

2.      I cannot understand equations (23)-(26) and Figure 4. Please explain them properly.

3.      I cannot understand Figures 8(b) and 9. Please explain them properly.

4.      Line 342-343 It is very strange to demonstrate code here. The manuscript should be consistent.

5.      Discussion is insufficient for the results in section 5. Limitations and policy implications should be addressed.

6.      The findings of this study are unclear to me. The current conclusion is based on just one case study, and its robustness can be weak. The genetic algorithm is a well-known heuristic one, and methodological contribution is still weak.

 

Minor

1.      Lines 8-9 should be deleted or updated.

2.      Line 26-27: Please revise the expression “some scholars at home and abroad.”

3.      Line 81-88. (1)-(3) are not written as research questions. Please revise them.

4.      Figure 1 can be reorganized as a Table.

5.      Line 100, and others. “social lanes” Please consider using another expression.

6.      Line 141, and others. “social vehicles” Please consider using another expression.

7.      Line 145, 181, and others. “parking cost” can be “stopping cost” or something.

8.      Table 3. Just the first and second rows can be sufficient to provide the information.

9.      Lines 434-463 should be deleted or updated.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.（Reply to Reviewer 1）

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

This paper presented a coordinated control method of bus signal priority and speed adjustment. Overall, the structure of this paper is well organized, and the presentation is relatively clear. The idea is interesting and has potential. However, there are still a few problems that need to be carefully addressed before a possible publication. More specifically,

1. Please carefully adjust the height of the variable symbols in the sentence to be consistent with the text, especially in Section 2.1.

2. Please keep the formula number right aligned.

 

3. In the speed adjustment method, vehicle position, velocity, and acceleration states could not be obtained directly. But these states are pretty important for the performance of your model. Usually, scholars would design robust estimation algorithms to obtain these states by integrating GPS and IMU information. As a result, some related references should be added to make the proposed method more readable: Automated vehicle sideslip angle estimation considering signal measurement characteristic; Autonomous Vehicle Kinematics and Dynamics Synthesis for Sideslip Angle Estimation Based on Consensus Kalman Filter; IMU-based automated vehicle body sideslip angle and attitude estimation aided by GNSS using parallel adaptive Kalman filters.

Author Response

please see the attachment. (Reply to Reviewer 2)

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

In particular, although the methodology is sufficiently clarified, it is not very clear whether the proposed strategy is at the planning (preventive) or control (implementation) level. In this second case it is necessary to specify whether it is a static type control (ie implemented with off-line procedures) or a dynamic type (ie with real-time procedures).

Finally, the authors must clarify how the bus is located, how the data relating to the state of the network are updated (signal status, degree of congestion, length of queues).

Some information on the devices used to detect the position of the bus and its degree of crowding should be provided.

Finally, the authors should include the evaluation of the reliability of the service provided using the 'Merry-Go-Round' paradigm in order to evaluate how the probability of a bus being late changes with respect to the evaluation of journey times (average values).

Author Response

Please see the attachment. (Reply to Reviewer 3)

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 4 Report

Dear authors,

Thank you for the huge effort for elaborating such an interesting manuscript.

The authors addressed the topic of maximising the benefits of bus line operation and passenger service. This paper presents a method for coordinated control of signal priority and speed adaptation in skip-stop mode. A genetic algorithm was used to solve the problem. Based on the simulation results, it was shown that passenger delay times and company operating costs can be minimised.

The article is correctly organised, citations refer to recent publications, figures understandable and clear. The conclusions relate to the arguments presented. A text correction is certainly required, e.g. line 8 

I appreciate the effort made in the research. Good luck in your future work.

Author Response

Thanks for your affirmation and encouragement of the revision of the paper. We greatly appreciate your time and efforts to improve our manuscript. In terms of writing, we have made further revisions to the manuscript and marked the revised parts in blue. 

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Thank you for your revisions. However, I am dissatisfied with your response.

 Your response to my major comments 1) said, “We have quoted the above studies in the

manuscript and made some relevant analyses.” However, I am unsure what “the above studies” are, and no additional analysis was made. Furthermore, your response letter showed that some parts of your revised manuscripts are in blue font, but nothing has been revised for this comment. These parts are the same as the original manuscripts.

 Your responses to my major comments 2) and 3) contain similar problems. Your response letter contains a blue font part, but nothing has been revised.

 Such attitudes appear insincere to me. Please consider submitting your manuscript to another journal.

Author Response

Thanks for your comments and suggestions. We apologize for not answering your question accurately last time and for the confusion caused by improper expression. We are willing to face up to the problem and try our best to correct it, and we hope that the following statements can answer your questions properly this time. Your affirmation will be a great encouragement to us.

We have marked the key changes in yellow in the manuscript.  See the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

The current version of the paper has satisfied all my previous observations

Author Response

We thank you for all your encouraging comments and valuable suggestions.