IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/transb/v177y2023ics0191261523001571.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Bibliometric analysis and systematic literature review of the traffic paradoxes (1968–2022)

Author

Listed:
  • Yao, Jia
  • Cheng, Ziyi
  • Chen, Anthony

Abstract

Braess proposed one of the classical traffic paradoxes in 1968, which states that adding a link in a transportation network may increase the travel cost for all travelers in the network. The paradox attracted substantial scholarly attention and research. However, there are many other paradoxical phenomena in the transportation field, which we call the traffic paradoxes. The purpose of this paper is to review studies on the traffic paradoxes that were published during 1968–2022. A bibliometric analysis approach is used to identify the distribution of all journal publications, influential papers, top contributing authors, and leading topics. The literature is classified on the basis of recurring themes, including the static traffic paradox, the dynamic traffic paradox, the multimodal traffic paradox, other paradoxes in the field of transportation, and observations and applications related to transportation networks. Finally, some future research directions are discussed. Our work should help the researchers, planners and engineers in the transportation field to understand the theme of traffic paradoxes systematically and comprehensively.

Suggested Citation

  • Yao, Jia & Cheng, Ziyi & Chen, Anthony, 2023. "Bibliometric analysis and systematic literature review of the traffic paradoxes (1968–2022)," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 177(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:transb:v:177:y:2023:i:c:s0191261523001571
    DOI: 10.1016/j.trb.2023.102832
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0191261523001571
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.trb.2023.102832?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. (Walker) Wang, Wei & Wang, David Z.W. & Sun, Huijun & Feng, Zengzhe & Wu, Jianjun, 2016. "Braess Paradox of traffic networks with mixed equilibrium behaviors," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 95-114.
    2. Du, Muqing & Chen, Anthony, 2022. "Sensitivity analysis for transit equilibrium assignment and applications to uncertainty analysis," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 175-202.
    3. Penchina, Claude M., 1997. "Braess paradox: Maximum penalty in a minimal critical network," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 31(5), pages 379-388, September.
    4. Wang, Aihu & Tang, Yuanhua & Mohmand, Yasir Tariq & Xu, Pei, 2022. "Modifying link capacity to avoid Braess Paradox considering elastic demand," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 605(C).
    5. Di, Xuan & Ban, Xuegang Jeff, 2019. "A unified equilibrium framework of new shared mobility systems," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 50-78.
    6. Prashker, Joseph N. & Bekhor, Shlomo, 2000. "Some observations on stochastic user equilibrium and system optimum of traffic assignment," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 34(4), pages 277-291, May.
    7. Bittihn, Stefan & Schadschneider, Andreas, 2018. "Braess paradox in a network with stochastic dynamics and fixed strategies," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 507(C), pages 133-152.
    8. Anna Nagurney & David Boyce, 2005. "Preface to “On a Paradox of Traffic Planning”," Transportation Science, INFORMS, vol. 39(4), pages 443-445, November.
    9. Richard Arnott & André de Palma & Robin Lindsey, 1993. "Properties of Dynamic Traffic Equilibrium Involving Bottlenecks, Including a Paradox and Metering," Transportation Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(2), pages 148-160, May.
    10. Yao, Jia & Chen, Anthony, 2014. "An analysis of logit and weibit route choices in stochastic assignment paradox," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 31-49.
    11. Basso, Leonardo J. & Jara-Díaz, Sergio R., 2012. "Integrating congestion pricing, transit subsidies and mode choice," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 46(6), pages 890-900.
    12. Zhang, Fangni & Yang, Hai & Liu, Wei, 2014. "The Downs–Thomson Paradox with responsive transit service," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 244-263.
    13. Millard-Ball, Adam, 2019. "The autonomous vehicle parking problem," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 99-108.
    14. Pas, Eric I. & Principio, Shari L., 1997. "Braess' paradox: Some new insights," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 31(3), pages 265-276, June.
    15. Knies, Austin & Lorca, Jorge & Melo, Emerson, 2022. "A recursive logit model with choice aversion and its application to transportation networks," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 155(C), pages 47-71.
    16. Dietrich Braess & Anna Nagurney & Tina Wakolbinger, 2005. "On a Paradox of Traffic Planning," Transportation Science, INFORMS, vol. 39(4), pages 446-450, November.
    17. Le Zhang & Lijing Lyu & Shanshui Zheng & Li Ding & Lang Xu, 2022. "A Q-Learning-Based Approximate Solving Algorithm for Vehicular Route Game," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-14, September.
    18. Dirk Helbing & Lubos Buzna & Anders Johansson & Torsten Werner, 2005. "Self-Organized Pedestrian Crowd Dynamics: Experiments, Simulations, and Design Solutions," Transportation Science, INFORMS, vol. 39(1), pages 1-24, February.
    19. Emmanuel Dechenaux & Shakun Mago & Laura Razzolini, 2014. "Traffic congestion: an experimental study of the Downs-Thomson paradox," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 17(3), pages 461-487, September.
    20. Akamatsu, Takashi, 2000. "A dynamic traffic equilibrium assignment paradox," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 34(6), pages 515-531, August.
    21. A. de Palma & Y. Nesterov, 2001. "Stationary Dynamic Solutions in Congested Transportation Networks: Summary and Perspectives," THEMA Working Papers 2001-19, THEMA (THéorie Economique, Modélisation et Applications), Université de Cergy-Pontoise.
    22. Xiaoning Zhang & H. Zhang, 2010. "Simultaneous Departure Time/Route Choices in Queuing Networks and a Novel Paradox," Networks and Spatial Economics, Springer, vol. 10(1), pages 93-112, March.
    23. Seungjae Lee & Shinhae Lee & Young-Ihn Lee, 2006. "Innovative Public Transport Oriented Policies in Seoul," Transportation, Springer, vol. 33(2), pages 189-204, March.
    24. Di, Xuan & Ma, Rui & Liu, Henry X. & Ban, Xuegang (Jeff), 2018. "A link-node reformulation of ridesharing user equilibrium with network design," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 230-255.
    25. Bagloee, Saeed Asadi & Sarvi, Majid & Wallace, Mark, 2016. "Bicycle lane priority: Promoting bicycle as a green mode even in congested urban area," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 102-121.
    26. Wang, Tao & Liao, Peng & Tang, Tie-Qiao & Huang, Hai-Jun, 2022. "Deterministic capacity drop and morning commute in traffic corridor with tandem bottlenecks: A new manifestation of capacity expansion paradox," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 168(C).
    27. Dafermos, Stella & Nagurney, Anna, 1984. "On some traffic equilibrium theory paradoxes," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 101-110, April.
    28. Friesz, Terry L. & Shah, Samir, 2001. "An overview of nontraditional formulations of static and dynamic equilibrium network design," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 35(1), pages 5-21, January.
    29. Chen, Danjue & Ahn, Soyoung & Chitturi, Madhav & Noyce, David A., 2017. "Towards vehicle automation: Roadway capacity formulation for traffic mixed with regular and automated vehicles," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 196-221.
    30. Xiang Zhang & S. Travis Waller, 2019. "Implications of link-based equity objectives on transportation network design problem," Transportation, Springer, vol. 46(5), pages 1559-1589, October.
    31. Morgan, John & Orzen, Henrik & Sefton, Martin, 2009. "Network architecture and traffic flows: Experiments on the Pigou-Knight-Downs and Braess Paradoxes," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 66(1), pages 348-372, May.
    32. Correia, Gonçalo Homem de Almeida & Looff, Erwin & van Cranenburgh, Sander & Snelder, Maaike & van Arem, Bart, 2019. "On the impact of vehicle automation on the value of travel time while performing work and leisure activities in a car: Theoretical insights and results from a stated preference survey," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 359-382.
    33. Yang, Chao & Chen, Anthony, 2009. "Sensitivity analysis of the combined travel demand model with applications," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 198(3), pages 909-921, November.
    34. Wei-Hua Lin & Hong K. Lo, 2009. "Investigating Braess' Paradox with Time-Dependent Queues," Transportation Science, INFORMS, vol. 43(1), pages 117-126, February.
    35. Lan Zhao & Anna Nagurney, 2005. "A network modeling approach for the optimization of Internet-based advertising strategies and pricing with a quantitative explanation of two paradoxes," Netnomics, Springer, vol. 7(2), pages 97-114, August.
    36. Ma, Jie & Xu, Min & Meng, Qiang & Cheng, Lin, 2020. "Ridesharing user equilibrium problem under OD-based surge pricing strategy," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 1-24.
    37. José R. Correa & Andreas S. Schulz & Nicolás E. Stier-Moses, 2007. "Fast, Fair, and Efficient Flows in Networks," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 55(2), pages 215-225, April.
    38. Xiaoning Zhang, 2013. "Effects of queue spillover in networks considering simultaneous departure time and route choices," Transportation Planning and Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 36(3), pages 267-286, April.
    39. C. Gawron, 1998. "An Iterative Algorithm to Determine the Dynamic User Equilibrium in a Traffic Simulation Model," International Journal of Modern Physics C (IJMPC), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 9(03), pages 393-407.
    40. Saeed Asadi Bagloee & Majid Sarvi & Avishai Ceder, 2017. "Transit priority lanes in the congested road networks," Public Transport, Springer, vol. 9(3), pages 571-599, October.
    41. Anna Nagurney & Ding Zhang, 1997. "Projected Dynamical Systems in the Formulation, Stability Analysis, and Computation of Fixed-Demand Traffic Network Equilibria," Transportation Science, INFORMS, vol. 31(2), pages 147-158, May.
    42. Jiang, Y. & Szeto, W.Y., 2016. "Reliability-based stochastic transit assignment: Formulations and capacity paradox," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 93(PA), pages 181-206.
    43. Bai-Bai Fu & Chun-Xue Zhao & Shu-bin Li, 2013. "The Analysis of Braess’ Paradox and Robustness Based on Dynamic Traffic Assignment Models," Discrete Dynamics in Nature and Society, Hindawi, vol. 2013, pages 1-8, December.
    44. Kasun P Wijayaratna & Vinayak V Dixit & Laurent Denant-Boemont & S Travis Waller, 2017. "An experimental study of the Online Information Paradox: Does en-route information improve road network performance?," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(9), pages 1-17, September.
    45. Rodriguez-Roman, Daniel & Ritchie, Stephen G., 2020. "Surrogate-based optimization for multi-objective toll design problems," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 485-503.
    46. Zhang, Fangni & Lindsey, Robin & Yang, Hai, 2016. "The Downs–Thomson paradox with imperfect mode substitutes and alternative transit administration regimes," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 104-127.
    47. Hedayat Z. Aashtiani & Hossain Poorzahedy *, 2004. "Braess' phenomenon in the management of networks and dissociation of equilibrium concepts," Transportation Planning and Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 27(6), pages 469-482, September.
    48. Sullivan, J.L. & Novak, D.C. & Aultman-Hall, L. & Scott, D.M., 2010. "Identifying critical road segments and measuring system-wide robustness in transportation networks with isolating links: A link-based capacity-reduction approach," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 44(5), pages 323-336, June.
    49. Wang, Wei (Walker) & Wang, David Z.W. & Zhang, Fangni & Sun, Huijun & Zhang, Wenyi & Wu, Jianjun, 2017. "Overcoming the Downs-Thomson Paradox by transit subsidy policies," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 126-147.
    50. Di, Xuan & Liu, Henry X. & Pang, Jong-Shi & Ban, Xuegang (Jeff), 2013. "Boundedly rational user equilibria (BRUE): Mathematical formulation and solution sets," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 300-313.
    51. Yasushi Masuda & Seungjin Whang, 2002. "Capacity Management in Decentralized Networks," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 48(12), pages 1628-1634, December.
    52. Yash Babar & Gordon Burtch, 2020. "Examining the Heterogeneous Impact of Ride-Hailing Services on Public Transit Use," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 31(3), pages 820-834, September.
    53. José R. Correa & Andreas S. Schulz & Nicolás E. Stier-Moses, 2004. "Selfish Routing in Capacitated Networks," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 29(4), pages 961-976, November.
    54. Bittihn, Stefan & Schadschneider, Andreas, 2021. "The effect of modern traffic information on Braess’ paradox," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 571(C).
    55. Fisk, Caroline, 1979. "More paradoxes in the equilibrium assignment problem," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 13(4), pages 305-309, December.
    56. Chunxue Zhao, 2014. "Dynamic Traffic Network Model and Time-Dependent Braess’ Paradox," Discrete Dynamics in Nature and Society, Hindawi, vol. 2014, pages 1-7, November.
    57. Konstantinos Katsikopoulos & Gerd Gigerenzer, 2008. "One-reason decision-making: Modeling violations of expected utility theory," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 37(1), pages 35-56, August.
    58. John Hartman, 2012. "Special Issue on Transport Infrastructure: A Route Choice Experiment with an Efficient Toll," Networks and Spatial Economics, Springer, vol. 12(2), pages 205-222, June.
    59. Wada, Kentaro & Satsukawa, Koki & Smith, Mike & Akamatsu, Takashi, 2019. "Network throughput under dynamic user equilibrium: Queue spillback, paradox and traffic control," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 391-413.
    60. Richard Steinberg & Willard I. Zangwill, 1983. "The Prevalence of Braess' Paradox," Transportation Science, INFORMS, vol. 17(3), pages 301-318, August.
    61. Bagloee, Saeed Asadi & (Avi) Ceder, Avishai & Sarvi, Majid & Asadi, Mohsen, 2019. "Is it time to go for no-car zone policies? Braess Paradox Detection," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 251-264.
    62. Anna Nagurney & Qiang Qiang, 2008. "An efficiency measure for dynamic networks modeled as evolutionary variational inequalities with application to the Internet and vulnerability analysis," Netnomics, Springer, vol. 9(1), pages 1-20, January.
    63. Koohyun Park, 2011. "Detecting Braess Paradox Based on Stable Dynamics in General Congested Transportation Networks," Networks and Spatial Economics, Springer, vol. 11(2), pages 207-232, June.
    64. Takashi Akamatsu & Benjamin Heydecker, 2003. "Detecting Dynamic Traffic Assignment Capacity Paradoxes in Saturated Networks," Transportation Science, INFORMS, vol. 37(2), pages 123-138, May.
    65. Stefano Catoni & Stefano Pallottino, 1991. "Technical Note—Traffic Equilibrium Paradoxes," Transportation Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(3), pages 240-244, August.
    66. Sagar Sahasrabudhe & Adilson E. Motter, 2011. "Rescuing ecosystems from extinction cascades through compensatory perturbations," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 2(1), pages 1-8, September.
    67. Muñoz, Juan Carlos & Soza-Parra, Jaime & Didier, Arturo & Silva, Constanza, 2018. "Alleviating a subway bottleneck through a platform gate," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 446-455.
    68. Zhao, Chunxue & Fu, Baibai & Wang, Tianming, 2014. "Braess paradox and robustness of traffic networks under stochastic user equilibrium," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 135-141.
    69. Sun, S. & Szeto, W.Y., 2018. "Logit-based transit assignment: Approach-based formulation and paradox revisit," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 191-215.
    70. Yao, Jia & Huang, Wenhua & Chen, Anthony & Cheng, Zhanhong & An, Shi & Xu, Guangming, 2019. "Paradox links can improve system efficiency: An illustration in traffic assignment problem," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 35-49.
    71. Yang, Hai, 1997. "Sensitivity analysis for the elastic-demand network equilibrium problem with applications," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 55-70, February.
    72. Zhaolin Cheng & Laijun Zhao & Huiyong Li, 2020. "A Transportation Network Paradox: Consideration of Travel Time and Health Damage due to Pollution," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(19), pages 1-22, October.
    73. Rapoport, Amnon & Mak, Vincent & Zwick, Rami, 2006. "Navigating congested networks with variable demand: Experimental evidence," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 27(5), pages 648-666, October.
    74. Lucija Bukvić & Jasmina Pašagić Škrinjar & Borna Abramović & Vladislav Zitrický, 2021. "Route Selection Decision-Making in an Intermodal Transport Network Using Game Theory," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-16, April.
    75. Roberto Cominetti & José Correa, 2001. "Common-Lines and Passenger Assignment in Congested Transit Networks," Transportation Science, INFORMS, vol. 35(3), pages 250-267, August.
    76. Rapoport, Amnon & Kugler, Tamar & Dugar, Subhasish & Gisches, Eyran J., 2009. "Choice of routes in congested traffic networks: Experimental tests of the Braess Paradox," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 65(2), pages 538-571, March.
    77. Yang, Hai & Bell, Michael G. H., 1998. "A capacity paradox in network design and how to avoid it," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 32(7), pages 539-545, September.
    78. Sun, Li & Liu, Like & Xu, Zhongzhi & Jie, Yang & Wei, Dong & Wang, Pu, 2015. "Locating inefficient links in a large-scale transportation network," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 419(C), pages 537-545.
    79. Di, Xuan & He, Xiaozheng & Guo, Xiaolei & Liu, Henry X., 2014. "Braess paradox under the boundedly rational user equilibria," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 86-108.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Yao, Jia & Huang, Wenhua & Chen, Anthony & Cheng, Zhanhong & An, Shi & Xu, Guangming, 2019. "Paradox links can improve system efficiency: An illustration in traffic assignment problem," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 35-49.
    2. Zhaolin Cheng & Laijun Zhao & Huiyong Li, 2020. "A Transportation Network Paradox: Consideration of Travel Time and Health Damage due to Pollution," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(19), pages 1-22, October.
    3. Di, Xuan & He, Xiaozheng & Guo, Xiaolei & Liu, Henry X., 2014. "Braess paradox under the boundedly rational user equilibria," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 86-108.
    4. Bagloee, Saeed Asadi & (Avi) Ceder, Avishai & Sarvi, Majid & Asadi, Mohsen, 2019. "Is it time to go for no-car zone policies? Braess Paradox Detection," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 251-264.
    5. Wang, Wei (Walker) & Wang, David Z.W. & Zhang, Fangni & Sun, Huijun & Zhang, Wenyi & Wu, Jianjun, 2017. "Overcoming the Downs-Thomson Paradox by transit subsidy policies," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 126-147.
    6. Yao, Jia & Chen, Anthony, 2014. "An analysis of logit and weibit route choices in stochastic assignment paradox," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 31-49.
    7. Shanjiang Zhu & David Levinson & Henry Liu, 2017. "Measuring winners and losers from the new I-35W Mississippi River Bridge," Transportation, Springer, vol. 44(5), pages 905-918, September.
    8. Wang, Aihu & Tang, Yuanhua & Mohmand, Yasir Tariq & Xu, Pei, 2022. "Modifying link capacity to avoid Braess Paradox considering elastic demand," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 605(C).
    9. Koohyun Park, 2011. "Detecting Braess Paradox Based on Stable Dynamics in General Congested Transportation Networks," Networks and Spatial Economics, Springer, vol. 11(2), pages 207-232, June.
    10. Ye, Jiao & Jiang, Yu & Chen, Jun & Liu, Zhiyuan & Guo, Renzhong, 2021. "Joint optimisation of transfer location and capacity for a capacitated multimodal transport network with elastic demand: a bi-level programming model and paradoxes," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 156(C).
    11. Ashraf, Muhammad Hasan & Chen, Yuwen & Yalcin, Mehmet G., 2022. "Minding Braess Paradox amid third-party logistics hub capacity expansion triggered by demand surge," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 248(C).
    12. Bittihn, Stefan & Schadschneider, Andreas, 2021. "The effect of modern traffic information on Braess’ paradox," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 571(C).
    13. Takashi Akamatsu & Benjamin Heydecker, 2003. "Detecting Dynamic Traffic Assignment Capacity Paradoxes in Saturated Networks," Transportation Science, INFORMS, vol. 37(2), pages 123-138, May.
    14. Wei-Hua Lin & Hong K. Lo, 2009. "Investigating Braess' Paradox with Time-Dependent Queues," Transportation Science, INFORMS, vol. 43(1), pages 117-126, February.
    15. Zhao, Chunxue & Fu, Baibai & Wang, Tianming, 2014. "Braess paradox and robustness of traffic networks under stochastic user equilibrium," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 135-141.
    16. Bittihn, Stefan & Schadschneider, Andreas, 2018. "Braess paradox in a network with stochastic dynamics and fixed strategies," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 507(C), pages 133-152.
    17. Du, Muqing & Chen, Anthony, 2022. "Sensitivity analysis for transit equilibrium assignment and applications to uncertainty analysis," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 175-202.
    18. Eyran Gisches & Amnon Rapoport, 2012. "Degrading network capacity may improve performance: private versus public monitoring in the Braess Paradox," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 73(2), pages 267-293, August.
    19. Rapoport, Amnon & Mak, Vincent & Zwick, Rami, 2006. "Navigating congested networks with variable demand: Experimental evidence," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 27(5), pages 648-666, October.
    20. Terry E. Daniel & Eyran J. Gisches & Amnon Rapoport, 2009. "Departure Times in Y-Shaped Traffic Networks with Multiple Bottlenecks," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 99(5), pages 2149-2176, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:transb:v:177:y:2023:i:c:s0191261523001571. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/548/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.