Optimization of transfer time efficiency evaluation index for airport arriving passengers
-
摘要:
换乘时间效率评价对提升机场综合交通的换乘效率有着重大意义，传统的指标优选方法应用在民航机场到港旅客换乘评价中难以真实反映指标关系并且缺乏指标筛选规则。针对上述问题，根据指标体系中目标层、因素层、指标层各自与指标的关联特征，抽象出指标的重要性、关联均衡性、独立性3种数据关系，并使用DS证据理论融合得到指标综合关系。基于指标综合关系和综合评价方法，定义评估精度作为筛选指标的理论支撑，并设计算法构建优选模型。使用国内37个机场的到港旅客换乘时间数据进行实证分析，结果表明：指标综合关系能够更精确地反映指标关系，优化了指标排序，比基于主成分分析和最大互信息系数的指标排序更优异，能剔除更多冗余指标。评估精度将可剔除的指标直观展示出来，为筛选指标提供了切实依据，完善了指标优选模型。
Abstract:The evaluation of transfer time efficiency is of great significance to improve the transfer efficiency of airport comprehensive transportation. The traditional index optimization method is difficult to truly reflect the index relationship and lacks of index screening rules in the transfer evaluation of inbound passengers at civil aviation airports. In light of the aforementioned issues, according to the target layer, factor layer, index layer and the correlation characteristics of indicators in the index system, this paper abstracts the importance, correlation equilibrium and independence of indicators, and uses DS evidence theory to fuse the comprehensive relationship of indicators. Based on the comprehensive relationship of indicators and the comprehensive evaluation method, evaluation accuracy is defined as the theoretical support of screening indicators, and the algorithm is designed to build the optimization model. Finally, the paper uses the data of 37 domestic airports to make an empirical analysis. The results show that the index comprehensive relationship can reflect the index relationship more accurately and optimize the index ranking, which is better than the index ranking based on principal component analysis and maximum mutual information coefficient, and can eliminate more redundant indexes. The evaluation accuracy identifies the indexes that may be intuitively eliminated, offering a useful basis for choosing indexes and enhancing the index optimization model.
-
图 2 五类标签下评估精度结果比较
Figure 2. Comparison of evaluation accuracy results under five kinds of labels
图 3 三类标签下评估精度结果比较
Figure 3. Comparison of evaluation accuracy results under three kinds of labels
表 1 原始指标体系
Table 1. Original index system
目标 因素 指标 换乘时间效率Y 换乘时间Y1 落地等待时间x1 下机摆渡时间x2 至行李转盘步行时间x3 行李等待时间x4 平均候车时间x5 旅客满意度Y2 落地等待时间满意度x6 下机摆渡时间满意度x7 至行李转盘步行时间满意度x8 行李等待时间满意度x9 平均候车时间满意度x10 预期达标率Y3 落地等待时间达标率x11 下机摆渡时间达标率x12 至行李转盘步行时间达标率x13 行李等待时间达标率x14 平均候车时间达标率x15 
下载: 导出CSV
表 2 指标综合关系量化结果排序
Table 2. Ranking of quantitative results of comprehensive index relationship
因素 指标 因素内排序 综合排序 Y1 x1 1 4 x2 4 9 x3 2 7 x4 5 11 x5 3 8 Y2 x6 4 13 x7 3 5 x8 2 2 x9 5 15 x10 1 1 Y3 x11 2 6 x12 4 12 x13 3 10 x14 5 14 x15 1 3
下载: 导出CSV
-
[1] 李盛阳, 张晓武, 邢立宁. 基于灵敏度分析的动态指标选取方法[J]. 计算机仿真, 2005, 22(3): 120-123. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-JSJZ200503010.htmLI S Y, ZHANG X W, XING L N. The method of dynamic selecting measures based on sensitivity analysis[J]. Computer Simulation, 2005, 22(3): 120-123(in Chinese). https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-JSJZ200503010.htm [2] 丛玮, 胡明华, 张晨. 复杂性指标体系的构建及精炼方法研究[J]. 交通运输系统工程与信息, 2012, 12(5): 130-134. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-YSXT201205021.htmCONG W, HU M H, ZHANG C. Construction and refinement method of metrics system[J]. Journal of Transportation Systems Engineering and Information Technology, 2012, 12(5): 130-134(in Chinese). https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-YSXT201205021.htm [3] TANG B, TANG J, LIU Y, et al. Comprehensive evaluation and application of GIS insulation condition. Part 1: Selection and optimization of insulation condition comprehensive evaluation index based on multi-source information fusion[J]. IEEE Access, 2019, 7: 88254-88263. doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2925804 [4] 杨柳, 汪妮, 解建仓, 等. 基于多源信息融合决策的灌区生态环境评价指标优选[J]. 农业工程学报, 2015, 31(14): 225-231. doi: 10.11975/j.issn.1002-6819.2015.14.031YANG L, WANG N, XIE J C, et al. Index optimization of eco-environment evaluation in irrigation district based on multi-source information fusion decision[J]. Transactions of the Chinese Society of Agricultural Engineering, 2015, 31(14): 225-231(in Chinese). doi: 10.11975/j.issn.1002-6819.2015.14.031 [5] 张耀天, 张旭成, 贾明顺, 等. 基于层次分析法的自适应决策评价方法[J]. 北京航空航天大学学报, 2016, 42(5): 1065-1070. doi: 10.13700/j.bh.1001-5965.2016.0224ZHANG Y T, ZHANG X C, JIA M S, et al. Adaptive evaluation method based on analytic hierarchy process[J]. Journal of Beijing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics, 2016, 42(5): 1065-1070(in Chinese). doi: 10.13700/j.bh.1001-5965.2016.0224 [6] ZHU Y M, HIPEL K W, KE Y G, et al. Establishment and optimization of an evaluation index system for brownfield redevelopment projects: An empirical study[J]. Environmental Modelling and Software, 2015, 74: 173-182. doi: 10.1016/j.envsoft.2015.09.012 [7] 王丽萍, 李宁宁, 马皓宇, 等. MIC-PCA耦合算法在径流预报因子筛选中的应用[J]. 中国农村水利水电, 2018(9): 36-41. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-ZNSD201809007.htmWANG L P, LI N N, MA H Y, et al. Research on the application of MIC-PCA algorithm in screening runoff forecast factors[J]. China Rural Water and Hydropower, 2018(9): 36-41(in Chinese). https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-ZNSD201809007.htm [8] 徐春荣, 任文婧, 周泓. 航空发动机研发能力建设项目后评价指标体系[J]. 北京航空航天大学学报, 2014, 40(8): 1160-1164. doi: 10.13700/j.bh.1001-5965.2013.0626XU C R, REN W J, ZHOU H. Post-evaluation index system for aero-engine R & D capacity building projects[J]. Journal of Beijing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics, 2014, 40(8): 1160-1164(in Chinese). doi: 10.13700/j.bh.1001-5965.2013.0626 [9] 迟国泰, 曹婷婷, 张昆. 基于相关-主成分分析的人的全面发展评价指标体系构建[J]. 系统工程理论与实践, 2012, 32(1): 111-119. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-XTLL201201016.htmCHI G T, CAO T T, ZHANG K. The establishment of human all-around development evaluation indicators system based on correlation-principle component analysis[J]. Systems Engineering-Theory & Practice, 2012, 32(1): 111-119(in Chinese). https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-XTLL201201016.htm [10] ZHANG Y. Construction of bid evaluation index system in government public project green procurement in China based on D-S evidence theory[J]. Sustainability, 2020, 12(2): 1-15. [11] SZEKELY G J, RIZZO M L, BAKIROV N K. Measuring and testing dependence by correlation of distances[J]. Annals of Statistics, 2007, 35(6): 2769-2794. [12] 师俊朋, 胡国平, 王馨. 基于证据融合的雷达反隐身性能评估方法[J]. 北京航空航天大学学报, 2015, 41(6): 1095-1101. doi: 10.13700/j.bh.1001-5965.2014.0388SHI J P, HU G P, WANG X. Evaluation method for radar anti-stealth performance based on evidence fusion[J]. Journal of Beijing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics, 2015, 41(6): 1095-1101(in Chinese). doi: 10.13700/j.bh.1001-5965.2014.0388 [13] 朱友清, 周石琳, 邹焕新. 基于相容系数的冲突证据合成方法及评价准则[J]. 系统工程与电子技术, 2014, 36(6): 1118-1123. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-XTYD201406017.htmZHU Y Q, ZHOU S L, ZOU H X. Combination method of conflict evidences and evaluation rule based on compatibility ratio[J]. Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2014, 36(6): 1118-1123(in Chinese). https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-XTYD201406017.htm [14] 张盛刚, 李巍华, 丁康. 基于证据可信度的证据合成新方法[J]. 控制理论与应用, 2009, 26(7): 812-814. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-KZLY200907022.htmZHANG S G, LI W H, DING K. A novel approach to evidence combination based on the evidence credibility[J]. Control Theory & Applications, 2009, 26(7): 812-814(in Chinese). https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-KZLY200907022.htm [15] 彭金栓, 方媛, 徐磊. 基于突变模型的轨道换乘效率评价[J]. 都市快轨交通, 2017, 30(4): 50-54. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-DSKG201704017.htmPENG J S, FANG Y, XU L. Rail transfer efficiency evaluation based on catastrophe model[J]. Urban Rapid Rail Transit, 2017, 30(4): 50-54(in Chinese). https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-DSKG201704017.htm [16] 张建平, 胡明华, 刘卫东. 终端区空中交通管制运行品质综合评价[J]. 西南交通大学学报, 2012, 47(2): 341-347. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-XNJT201202028.htmZHANG J P, HU M H, LIU W D. Integrated evaluation for operation performance of air traffic control in terminal area[J]. Journal of Southwest Jiaotong University, 2012, 47(2): 341-347(in Chinese). https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-XNJT201202028.htm [17] 吕雅慧, 郧文聚, 张超, 等. 基于TOPSIS和BP神经网络的高标准农田综合识别[J]. 农业机械学报, 2018, 49(3): 196-204. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-NYJX201803024.htmLV Y H, YUN W J, ZHANG C, et al. Multi-characteristic comprehensive recognition of well-facilitied farmland based on TOPSIS and BP neural network[J]. Transactions of the Chinese Society for Agricultural Machinery, 2018, 49(3): 196-204(in Chinese). https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-NYJX201803024.htm [18] GEGOVSKA T, KOKER R, CAKAR T. Green supplier selection using fuzzy multiple-criteria decision-making methods and artificial neural networks[J]. Computational Intelligence and Neuroscience, 2020, 2020: 8811834. [19] LIU X, ZHOU X, ZHU B, et al. Measuring the maturity of carbon market in China: An entropy-based TOPSIS approach[J]. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2019, 229: 94-103. [20] XIAO W, LV X J, ZHAO Y L, et al. Ecological resilience assessment of an arid coal mining area using index of entropy and linear weighted analysis: A case study of Shendong Coalfield, China[J]. Ecological Indicators, 2020, 109: 105843. [21] 武增海, 李涛. 高新技术开发区综合绩效空间分布研究——基于自然断点法的分析[J]. 统计与信息论坛, 2013, 28(3): 82-88. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-TJLT201303016.htmWU Z H, LI T. The comprehensive performance evaluation of the high-tech development zone: Analysis based on the natural breakpoint method[J]. Statistics & Information Forum, 2013, 28(3): 82-88(in Chinese). https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-TJLT201303016.htm [22] CAPSE. 千万级机场乘机时间效率分析[R]. 合肥:CAPSE, 2019. CAPSE. Time efficiency analysis of 10 million class airports[R]. Hefei: CAPSE, 2019(in Chinese). -
下载:
点击查看大图
计量
- 文章访问数: 262
- HTML全文浏览量: 74
- PDF下载量: 32
- 被引次数: 0
