2nd IFAC Symposium on Telematics Applications

Politehnica University, Timisoara, Romania

October 5-8, 2010

Train Traffic Control

Based on Distributed Resource Allocation
T. S. Letia, A. Astilean, R. Miron, M.M. Santa
Dept. of Automation Technical University of Cluj-Napoca, Daicoviciu St.,
15, 40020, Cluj-Napoca, Romania ;e-mail: Tiberiu.Letia@aut.utcluj.ro;
Adina.Astilean@aut.utcluj.ro; Radu.Miron@aut.utcluj.ro; Maria.SANTA@aut.utcluj.ro
Abstract: The railway traffic is characterized as a large and dynamic system with uncertain properties
related to resource loading, train arrivals and failures. Despite these uncertainties, the control system is
expected to guarantee that all the trains behave according to their timelines. The current approach solves
the railway traffic control problem using the resource allocation. The trains are considered tasks with
specified temporal behaviors that have to fulfill their deadlines. The solutions based on open loop, closed
loop with independent, coordinated and heterarchical controllers are defined and compared. The control
signals are implemented and verified using time Petri nets. Some algorithms for control system
implementation are given. The method evaluations are performed using the meter functions: utility,
utilization, reservation and efficiency. The results obtained through simulations show that the proposed
distributed controllers solve adequately the control problems and can be used for large scale
implementation.
Keywords: railway traffic control, resource allocation, scheduling, real-time control, distributed control,
Petri nets, train specification.
line is signalized by detectors. The railway network is
composed of a set of linked resources (lines, platforms etc.).
The state of a resource can be reserved or released.

1. INTRODUCTION
The railway traffic control system is a dynamic one that
operates in an environment with uncertain properties that
include transient resource overloads, arbitrary arrivals,
arbitrary failures and decreases of traffic parameters. Unlike
classical real-time control applications that usually concern
only the response times to meet the deadlines, railway traffic
involves the reasoning about end-to-end timelines and the
reaction to events such that the global traffic system fulfills
the time requirements.
Despite many uncertainties, the control system is expected to
guarantee that all the trains behave according to timelines.
The current paper solves the Railway Traffic Control (RTC)
problem using the resource allocation. The railway resources
are lines, switches and platforms. They can be allocated
synchronously (in a specified period of time) or
asynchronously (until the occurrence of an event of release).
From another point of view, the allocation can be performed
off-line, before a train starts, or on-line, during the system
evolution when a train reaches some points. The main control
problems of train traffic are analyzed, developed and
modeled, starting with a complete but ideal set of
requirements.Then, more complex situations are progressively
introduced, offering solutions for many sets of characteristics.

Fig. 1. Example of railway structure

The term Task is introduced to define the control problem. It
consists of the moves of a train from a given platform (line) of
a railway station, to a specified platform (line) of another
railway station. An example of a synthetic description of such
a task is given in Table 1.
Table 1. Train table

Figure 1 presents a part of a railway network with the

following specified elements: traffic lights, denoted by
s1,,s8; switch points; detectors, represented by squares;
interlockings (an aggregate of switches), denoted by I0, , I3;
platforms, denoted by P1, , P8; lines, denoted by L1 and L2;
trains, denoted by T1, , T4. The presence of trains on the
978-3-902661-84-5/10/$20.00 2010 IFAC

Train
T1
T2
T3
T4
1

Departure
Place
Time
S_A.P1
0
S_A.P4
6
S_B.P5
5
S_B.P8
9

Arrival
Place
Time
S_B.P7
15
S_B.P5
25
S_A.P4
22
S_A.P1
36

10.3182/20101005-4-RO-2018.00002

TA 2010
Timisoara, Romania, Oct 5-8, 2010

A train control problem consists of a set of tasks which have

to be controlled (acting on traffic lights and switches) such
that all the trains fulfill the departure and arrival times.

2. STATE OF THE ART

The basic principles of railway traffic control are given in
Pachl, J. (2004). These include the interlocking usage,
resource management and the partitioning of the railway
network into different subsystems. The train deviations from
the scheduled timetable should be removed during the
operation (Tornquist, J. et al., 2005).

A train specification refers to the shortest duration needed by

a train to cross a resource. For the given example, the train
specifications are presented in a tabular form in Table 2.
Table 2. Resource occupation
Train
T1
T2
T3
T4

P1
1
1
1
1

P2
1
1
1
1

Resource occupation
P8
I0
I1
L1
1
1
1
10
1
1
1
11
1
1
1
12
1
1
1
13

L2
10
11
12
13

I2
1
1
1
1

New trends of train traffic control and management started

since 1997 (Shoji, S. et al., 1997). An autonomous
decentralized train control and management system is
proposed to attain both the real-time properties for train
control, such as the real-time traffic and non-real-time
properties for train management. Train scheduling
implementations can be:

I3
1
1
1
1

- off-line scheduling when all the train arrival times and

departure times are calculated before the train starts. No
unexpected event happens and no new train can appear.

E.g. from Table 2, specifications of train T1 for P1 is: P1[1].

Here, [r] specifies the duration r [min.] of the resource
utilization. It is a relative time.

- on-line scheduling when the scheduling is performed during

the train traffic operation. Some trains have variable delays,
unexpected events happen, and new train scheduling requests
are demanded and accepted during the operation.

Potential train schedule solutions consist of sets of

specifications for different potential routes (sequentially
occupied resources). For the given example, the train T1
schedule can be written as:

Some train scheduling approaches are based on:

[T1] = P1[1]I0[1]( L1[10]I2[1]+ I1[1]L2[10])I3[1] P7[1]

- distributed artificial intelligence (trackside intelligent

controllers, Tao, T., 2003). This kind of allocation of function
can optimize the use of resources, reduce complexity and
enhance the reliability and availability of the traffic system;

Operator . is used to express the sequentiality and +

expresses the alternative (the possibility to choose another
sequence of resources in order to reach the same destination).
When the train start time is given, i.e., the schedule solution
can be presented in the following form using the absolute
times:

- heuristic methods (as genetic algorithms, Higgins, A. et al.,

1997) or ant colony systems (Ghoseri, K. et al., 2006). The
NP-hard problem complexity with respect to the number of
conflicts in the schedule is avoided by generating random
solutions and guiding the search;

(T1) = start(0)P1(0;1)I0(1;2)L1(2;12)I2(12;13)I3(13;14)
P7(14;15) + start(0)P1(0;1)I0(1;2)I1(2;3)L2(3;13)I3(13;14)
P7(14;15)

- auction (Parkes, D.C. et al., 2000) when each train is

represented by an agent that bids for right to travel through a
network from departure to arrival;

The sequence of a path contains the elements Rj(e;l) where Rj

is the needed resource, e is the earliest time when the resource
is required and l is the latest time when the resource is
reserved. This is presented using a state machine, Figure 2.
[1]

[1]

[10]

[1]

P1

I0

L1

I2

STOP

S tart

I1

L2

I3

P8

[1]

[10]

[1]

[1]

- interactive scheduling (Lova, A. et al., 2007) designated to

interactive applications is used to assist planners in adding
new trains on a complex railway network.
An improvement can be obtained using the GPS (Global
Positioning System) and wireless communication between
train engine and local control centre proposed by
Zimmermann, A. et al. (2003). Some distributed signal control
systems based on the internet technology are also used
(Fukuta, Y. et al., 2007).

Fig. 2. State machine corresponding to train T1

Li, K. et al. (2007) propose cellular automata based method to

analyze the space-time diagram of railway traffic flow.
Formal development and verification of a distributed railway
control system are performed applying a series of refinement
and verification steps (Hauxthausen, A. et al., 2000). The
distributed train scheduling problem has some similarities
with distributed software job scheduling (Fahmy, S. F. et al.
2008a and 2008b). Both have to fulfil real-time constraints
relative to finishing time, communication requests and
resource management.

Let pathList(T1) be the list of the paths of the train T1 (listed

in the preferred order) that can fulfill the requirements.
Control signals modify the state of switches and traffic lights.
E.g.: signal(I0(P1,L1)) requires to establish a connection
between P1 and L1.
A train schedule solution specifies the used resources, the
occupancy order and the time spent by the train on each
resource. The trains schedule can be marked in a resource
reservation table.

TA 2010
Timisoara, Romania, Oct 5-8, 2010

Considering some general basic principles of the future train

control systems and particularly special characteristics of
ETCS (European Train Control Systems) based on mobile
communication, Zimmermann, A. and Hommel, G. present a
simplified model of communication failure and recover
behaviour as well as safety-critical data exchange. Following
the tendency to increase track utilization and train safety by
using the opportunities offered by a preferment mobile
communication based control system, Tianhua, X. et al.
(2007) present a related data communication system model.
The influences of communication collision and message
length on the transfer delay were evaluated. To meet some
particular system characteristics of the low-densities lines,
Tao, T. (2003) proposes a train control system, based on
satellite location and intelligent autonomous decentralized
systems technologies. The development is focused on the
improving of train traffic punctuality and the increasing
utilization of the railway infrastructure and less on the
working in a preventive manner. Kauppi, A. et al. (2006)
propose, in this context, a high-level control strategy and a
prototype tool to evaluate the control performances.

associated to the transitions of the controller, determining the

timed commands sequence, are in accordance with the time
intervals for which the resources are occupied. The controller
implements the train schedule.

Oriented to analyse temporal trains behaviour and on the

adjustment of train operation plan, Yangdong, Y. et al. (2005)
define a fuzzy time Petri net to describe temporal uncertainty
of train group operation. They introduce four fuzzy set
theoretic functions of time for the corresponding
representation.

Fig. 3. Train schedules

3. OPEN LOOP CONTROL

Although the open loop control approach does not completely
correspond to a real situation, it is suitable to describe and
solve some of the most important control aspects. Two
neighbour railway stations are considered, Figure 1. A
comprehensive diagram of the resources allocation is
presented in Figure 3. On the vertical axis and on the
horizontal axis are represented the time and the sequentially
occupied resources for different tasks, respectively.

Fig. 4. RTC System Architecture - open loop

The open loop control structure is presented in Figure 4. The

RTC system has a schedule for each train and applies the
control signals to implement the solutions. A part of the
behaviour of the controller and the train T1 in Station A is
presented in Figure 5 using a Petri Net based model of the
system. The marking evolution of the upper Petri Net
subsystem corresponds to the states evolution of the
controller, which supervises the train movements. In this
example, only the movement of train T1 is modelled by the
lower place-transition row. Some transitions have associated
fixed time values, corresponding to the shortest durations of
the real activities, while other transitions (represented by dark
rectangles) fire instantaneously (e.g. start transitions, send
control signals etc.). The following interpretation is associated
to the Petri nets nodes: P4 - initial state of the train (the train
waits for the signal); P0 - initial state of C-A controller; T0 controller signals the traffic light s1 ON; T2 - Train T1 begins
to move on P1; T1 - controller signals I0 to connect P1 with L1;
T6 - controller waits 2 min to signal the traffic lights s5 ON;
T4 - Train T1 begins the crossing of I0; T7 - the train begins
the movement on L1; T8 - the train moves along L1. The
behaviour of the process and the corresponding model are
similar for the others trains. It can be noticed that the delays

Fig. 5. Time Petri Net of RTC Open loop.

4. CLOSED LOOP CONTROL WITH INDEPENDENT
CONTROLLERS
The independent controllers can be used when the trains do
not have significant delays. Although some important control
aspects were taken into account in the previous approach, an
open loop based control does not represent a realistic solution.
Even when a schedule is rigorously implemented, some
variations of the time intervals (described in the train
specifications) occur, such that a closed loop control scheme
(Figure 6) is necessary. Each railway route element has
associated a min-max interval. Also, each resource has
associated a detector that signals the presence or the
movement of trains in the corresponding zone. Immediately
after a train finishes the crossing of an element, the detector
sends a signal to the controller. The releasing of the resources
being signalised in time, the controller can better manage their
utilisation. An extension of the time Petri nets given in Figure

TA 2010
Timisoara, Romania, Oct 5-8, 2010

5 with the release events was constructed for the closed-loop

control.

train agent has a list of paths (PathList) from the departure

platforms of the train (task) to the accessible critical resources
that can be used to fulfill the requirements. This path is firmly
reserved only when the coordinator grants the reservation of
the critical resource. When a request from a train agent
arrives, the coordinator grants or refuses the requirements
immediately. This avoids the blocking of the train agent on a
particular path reservation. For the given example, a train Ti,
currently stopped on a platform of a station A, gets a path to a
critical resource (L1 or L2) from Agent_i and from the critical
resource to the destination resource (a platform of the station
B) by a complementary agent ~Agent_i installed on a
computer in station B. Some algorithms to solve the
distributed scheduling problem are used:

Fig. 6. RTC system architecture - closed loop

The functioning of such a system is efficient as long as the
controller is able to correct the time deviation, but cannot be
applied in situations when long delays occur and a
reallocation of resources is imperatively needed. In this case,
the decision process is divided among many decision entities,
connected in more complex control structures as follows.

Coordinator algorithm:
1: initialize: the critical resource states as not reserved;
2: while(true)
3: receive a message from a train agent or controller
4: if the message is request(resource, train)
5:
if the resource is released
6:
answer true;
7:
mark the resource reserved;
9:
else answer false;
10: if the message is release(resource, train)
11:
mark the resource released;
12:
notify the complementary train agent (~Agent_i)
about the crossing event;
13: end while;

5. COORDINATED CONTROLLERS
When the trains have significant delays the previous methods
are not convenient due to the large amount of time required to
reserve the resources. The coordinated control system
structure is given in Figure 7.

Fig. 7. RTC system architecture coordinated control

Agent_Train_i algorithm:
The resources on the frontier are considered critical
resources. They are associated to the critical sections of the
tasks. A critical section is an element or a sequence of
elements of the path crossing the frontier, where if two trains
enter, they cannot avoid the deadlock or the collision. L1 and
L2 are the critical resources for the given example. The
coordinator manages the access to the critical resources. The
task diagram of this method is presented in Figure 8. A local
control subsystem is composed of a controller, a number of
train agents, a Resource Table and a Train Schedule Table.
Each train has assigned a corresponding train agent. The
controller assigned to each station has the task to implement
the train schedules received from train agents. For this
purpose, the controller signals the traffic lights and the
interlockings. It handles signals received from detectors to
advance its execution and to release the reserved resources.

1: input: PathList, trainSpecification;

2: initialization: mark the train not scheduled;
3: output: train schedule;
4: wait(start);
5: while (train is not scheduled)
6: do
7:
choose a path from the PathList and try to reserve it;
8:
if reservation is obtained request(critical resource,
train);
9:
receive(answer);
10:
if (answer is true) mark the train scheduled;
11:
else cancel the reservation;
12: while train is not scheduled or not all the paths from the
PathList were used;
13: if (train is scheduled)
14:
load the train schedule on the Train Schedule Table;
15: else wait a period and try a new reservation;
16: end while;
A complementary agent executes a similar algorithm with the
difference that the train paths are from a critical resource to a
platform.
6. HETERARCHICAL CONTROLLERS
The heterarchical controllers implement a kind of cooperative
control. When the trains have significant delays the following
proposed control method involves the direct cooperation
among the distributed control components. The architecture
for the implementation of this method is given in Figure 9.

Figure 8. Task diagram of the coordination method

The train agent uses the train specification, the resource table
and the coordinator service to get a path that leads the train
from the departure platform to a frontier critical resource. The
4

TA 2010
Timisoara, Romania, Oct 5-8, 2010

Reservation: the ratio between the sum of the demanded

reservation durations of all train resources occupancy and the
scheduled period K multiplied by m:

Controller C _B

Controller C_A

i ,k

reservatio n =

Fig. 9. RTC system architecture heterarchical control

efficiency

[l ]

R i,k [t ]

k =1 i =1
n
m

R i ,k [ d ]

The best performances were obtained using the on-line

scheduling method. Although the resource reservation
durations are almost the same in the case of the on-line and
off-line scheduling algorithms, the first algorithm cancels the
excess resources reservations and that improves the number of
missed deadlines. Figure 11 presents the efficiency measures
for the two scheduling algorithms.
Each train has specified a laxity time Xi (=10 minutes) and a
deadline Di to arrive at destination. Let T_i be the longest
time the train Ti can arrive at destination if it is not delayed by
other trains. The mentioned task parameters fulfil the relation:

Ttravel Di = T_i + Xi,

A train Ti is correctly scheduled and controlled if it arrives at

destination before the deadline Di (i. e. T_i extended with the
laxity time Xi). For the given example, Figure 12 presents the
number of trains missing the deadlines relative to the train
speed variations (vi) due to the environment conditions.

(1)

where Ri,k[l] is the longest duration of the reservation of the

resource Ri for a train Tk (i. e. l) and n is the number of
scheduled trains;
Utilization: the ratio between the sum of the effective
durations of all train resource occupancy (when each of them
could be delayed by other trains) and the scheduled period K
multiplied by m:
n

m
i ,k

utilizatio n =

k =1 i =1

mK

(5)

where Ttravel is the duration of train traveling time.

mK

(4)

The method evaluations were performed for the cases when

the trains have variations of their start time si and variations
of the resource Ri utilization (given by their variable speed)
denoted by vi. The tests were performed for si = vi for all
the trains. A random function generates variable delays
between 0 and si. The results are presented in Figure 10. The
on-line method obtains the best performances while the offline method the worst.

m
i ,k

k =1 i =1

Utility: the ratio between the sum of the necessary durations

of all trains resources occupancy when each of them is the
only train in the railway network and the scheduled period K
multiplied by the number of resources m:

k =1 i =1

(3)

The trains (tasks) are considered to be executed periodically

(with a test period K of 50 minutes). The simulations show
that the trains do not collide and do not enter in deadlocks.
The scheduling algorithm performances can be evaluated
using the following measure functions:

mK

7. TESTS AND VERIFICATIONS

utility =

[d ]

k =1 i =1

Efficiency: the ratio between the sum of all resources

utilization durations for all the trains and the sum of all
resources reservation demands for all trains

The method using heterarchical controllers does not include

coordinators as can be seen in Figure 9. The distributed
control system contains only local controllers and train agents.
The train agent is responsible to get a reserved path from a
platform to a critical resource situated on the frontier. It
performs the reservation using the local resource table. The
train agent requests the complementary train agent (from the
neighbor station) to accept the train on the critical resource
during a specified period of time [e, l] (where e is the earliest
time and l is the latest time when the train arrives at the
critical resource). The complementary agent tries to reserve
the resource on the resource table. If the reservation succeeds,
the complementary agent answers true. Otherwise it answers
false. If the answer is true, the train agent loads the schedule
on the Train Schedule Table. When the answer is false, the
train agent cancels the reservation and tries the reservation of
another path. When the train arrives at the critical resource,
the corresponding detector signals that, the train agent handles
the signal (via local controller) and notifies the
complementary agent about the crossing event.

Railway Traffic Network

(traffic lights, switches or points, trains etc.)

[t ]

(2)
Fig. 10. Performances of the on-line scheduling algorithm

where Ri,k[t] represents the effective time duration of

resource Ri occupation by the Tk train;
5

TA 2010
Timisoara, Romania, Oct 5-8, 2010

Ghoseri, K. and Merscedsolouk, F., (2006). ACT-Ts: Train

scheduling using ant colony system, Journal of Applied
Mathematics and Decision Science, pp. 1-28.
Goverde, R.M.P., (2006). A delay propagation algorithm for
large-scale scheduled rail traffic, Preprints of 11th IFAC
Symposium on Control in Transportation Systems, Delft,
Netherlands, 2006, pp. 169-175.
Hauxthausen, A. and Peleska, J., (2000). Formal development
and verification of a distributed railway control system,
IEEE Trans. on Software Engineering, volume: 26,
pp.687-701.
Higgins, A. and Kozan, E., (1997). Heuristics techniques for
single line train scheduling, Journal of Heuristics, 3,
Kluwer Academic Publishers, pp. 43-62.
Kauppi, A. ., Wikstrm, J., Sandblad, . B. and Andersson,
A. W., (2006). Future train traffic control: control by replanning, Cogn. Tech. Work, volume: 8, pp. 5056.
Li, K., Gao, ZiYou, Yang LiXing, (2007). Modeling and
simulation for train control system using cellular
automata, China Ser E-Tech Sci., volume: 50, no. 6, pp.
765-773.
Lova, A.,Tormas, P., and Other, (2007). Intelligent train
scheduling on high-loaded railway network, Algorithmic
Methods for Railway Optimization, Springer, Berlin,
volume: 4359, pp. 219-232.
Pachl, J.,(2004). Railway Operation and Control, VTD Rail
Publishing, Mountlake Terrace WA 98043 USA.
Parkes, D.C., and Ungar, L.H., (2000). An auction-based
method for decentralized train scheduling, Proceedings of
the Fifth International Conference on Autonomous
Agents, Montreal, Canada, pp. 43-50.
Shoji, S., Igarashi, A. (1997). New trends of train control and
management systems with real-time and non-real-time
properties, Proceedings of the 3rd International
Symposium on Autonomous Decentralized Systems
(ISADS97), pp. 319-326.
Tao, T. (2003). A train control system for low-density lines
based on intelligent autonomous decentralized system
(IADS), Proceedings of the Sixth International
Symposium on Autonomous Decentralized Systems
(ISADS03), pp. 203-207.
Tianhua Xu Tao Tang, (2007). The modelling and analysis of
data communication system (DCS) in Communication
Based Train Control (CBTC) with Colored Petri Nets,
Eighth International Symposium on Autonomous
Decentralized Systems 2007 (ISADS'07), pp. 83-87.
Tornquist, J. and Persson, J.A., (2005). Train traffic deviation
handling using tabu search and simulated annealing,
Proceeding of the 38th Annual Hawaii International
Conference on System Science, pp. 73a.
Zimmermann, A. and Hommel, G., (2003). A train control
system case study in model-based real-time system
design, Proceedings of the International Parallel and
Distributed Processing Symposium (IPDPS03), Nice,
France, pp. 118b.
Yangdong, Y., Wang, J. and Limin Jia, L., (2005). Analysis of
temporal uncertainty of trains converging based on Fuzzy
Time Petri Nets , L. Wang and Y. Jin (Eds.): FSKD 2005,
LNAI 3613, Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg, pp. 89
99.

Fig. 11. The resource allocation efficiency

Fig. 12. The arrival missed deadlines

8. CONCLUSIONS
The open loop controllers could be successfully used for the
case when train speed variations due to environment
conditions are ignorable. In this case, the resource
reservations can be performed off-line. For the case when the
environment involves larger speed variations, the closed loop
with the release of resources signaling as soon as the trains
leave them can lead to better performances only when the
scheduling is performed on-line. The heterarchical scheduling
method has a reduced search space of the solution as
compared to the coordinated scheduling method, but their
allocation performances are similar. The on-line scheduling
methods obtain better performances for timelines fulfilling as
compared to the off-line scheduling methods.
The proposed algorithm solves the deadlock avoidance
problem by the complete allocation of the train paths between
the platforms of two neighbor stations. The message
transmission durations between two actors can be neglected
taking into account the system dynamics. Consequently, the
update of the system state can be performed without
significant delays.
REFERENCES
Fahmy, S.F., Ravindran, B., and Jensen, E.D., (2008a). On
collaborative scheduling of distributable real-time threads
in dynamic, Networked Embedded Systems, Proceedings
of the 11th IEEE Symposium on Object Oriented RealTime Distributed Computing (ISORC), pp. 485-491.
Fahmy, S.F., Ravindran, B., and Jensen, E.D., (2008b).
Scheduling distributable real-time threads in the presence
of crash failures and message losses, ACM SAC, Track
on Real-Time Systems, pp. 294-301.
Fukuta, Y., G. Kogure, G., and other, (2007). Novel railway
signal control system based on the internet technology
and its distributed control architecture, Proceedings of the
Eighth International Symposium on Autonomous
Decentralized Systems (ISADS'07), pp. 77-82.