designing the transit marketplace Sid Banerjee CNTS Workshop, July - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

designing the transit marketplace
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

designing the transit marketplace Sid Banerjee CNTS Workshop, July - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

designing the transit marketplace Sid Banerjee CNTS Workshop, July 2019 Operations Research, Cornell ridesharing platforms critical components of modern urban transit crucible for real-time decision making/OR/EconCS 1/22 research in


slide-1
SLIDE 1

designing the transit marketplace

Sid Banerjee CNTS Workshop, July 2019

Operations Research, Cornell

slide-2
SLIDE 2

ridesharing platforms

  • critical components of modern urban transit
  • crucible for real-time decision making/OR/EconCS

1/22

slide-3
SLIDE 3

research in ridesharing: logistics

credit: lyft research science 2/22

slide-4
SLIDE 4

research in ridesharing: market design

credit: lyft research science 3/22

slide-5
SLIDE 5

shout-out to all my co-passengers

Daniel Freund Raga G Chamsi Hssaine Ramesh Johari Yash Kanoria Thodoris Lykouris Pengyu Qian Carlos Riquelme Samitha Samaranayake Thibault S´ ejourn´ e special shout out to – the amazing folks in the lyft research science team – ARO (W911NF-17-1-0094) & NSF (ECCS1847393, DMS1839346) support

4/22

slide-6
SLIDE 6

what we have worked on

stochastic control models for ridesharing Markov chain (queueing network) of cars in network – available cats + occupied cars + empty-car rebalancing – Poisson passenger arrivals, loss system – state-dependent pricing/dispatch/rebalancing

5/22

slide-7
SLIDE 7

what we can do

theorem [Banerjee, Freund & Lykouris 2017] flow relaxation gives state-independent dispatch policy which is

  • 1 + n−1

K

approximate (with instantaneous trips)

  • 1 + O
  • 1

√ K

  • approximate (with travel-times, heavy-traffic)

theorem [Banerjee, Kanoria & Qian 2018] family of state-dependent dispatch policies which are

  • 1 + e−Θ(K) approximate (for large K, instantaneous trips)
  • convex program gives optimal exponent

6/22

slide-8
SLIDE 8

for more on this

survey chapter Ride Sharing, Banerjee & Johari in Sharing Economy, Springer Series in Supply Chain Management

7/22

slide-9
SLIDE 9

so did ridesharing ‘solve’ transit?

8/22

slide-10
SLIDE 10

(my view of) the next big challenge

two research vignettes

  • impact of platform competition

. . . and data vs. modeling

  • designing transit marketplaces

. . . and the role of regulation

9/22

slide-11
SLIDE 11

the price of demand fragmentation

9/22

slide-12
SLIDE 12

price of fragmentation in ridesharing ecosystems

  • ‘societal cost’ of decentralized optimization?

– multiple platforms with exogenously partitioned demands – individual platforms do optimal rebalancing price of fragmentation under exogenous demand split, increase in rebalancing costs of multiple platforms vs. single platform (under large-market scaling)

10/22

slide-13
SLIDE 13

counterfactual simulation: NYC taxi data

γθ vs. θ; NYC TLC data clustered into 40 stations

11/22

slide-14
SLIDE 14

price of fragmentation in ridesharing markets

theorem [S´ ejourn´ e, Samaranayake & Banerjee 2018] price of fragmentation undergoes a phase transition based on structure

  • f underlying demand

– both regimes observed in NYC data (≈ 10% fragmentation-affected)

12/22

slide-15
SLIDE 15

warning: affects numerical simulations in unpredictable ways

fraction of affected regimes depends on data-aggregation granularity (number of stations/time interval) effect of spatial granularity effect of temporal granularity

13/22

slide-16
SLIDE 16

designing a transit marketplace

13/22

slide-17
SLIDE 17

the transit marketplace

14/22

slide-18
SLIDE 18

not yet, but. . .

15/22

slide-19
SLIDE 19

transit marketplace

model

  • each commuter has a public type

– type = vector of valuations, one for each multi-modal option – we normalize transit value to 0

  • market presents price-mode menu: price for each multi-modal option

16/22

slide-20
SLIDE 20

transit marketplace: objectives

  • perational objective

reduce frictions, improve reliability for multi-modal trips economic objective set prices to maximize overall social welfare is this all we care about?

17/22

slide-21
SLIDE 21

pareto improvement as a desiderata for markets

18/22

slide-22
SLIDE 22

transit marketplace: objectives

  • perational objective

reduce frictions, improve reliability for multi-modal trips economic objective set prices to maximize overall social welfare AND ensure pareto improvement for all participants (commuters/firms)

19/22

slide-23
SLIDE 23

transit marketplace: incorporating PI constraints

problem: these may be incompatible! (Myerson-Satterthwaite)

20/22

slide-24
SLIDE 24

transit marketplace: preliminary results

21/22

slide-25
SLIDE 25

my view of the transportation landscape

where we stand

  • transportation network control is real!

– Lyft/Uber operate giant network control systems

  • unified models for ridesharing

– guide for designing good online controls (pricing/rebalancing) – sandbox for studying more complex problems

22/22

slide-26
SLIDE 26

my view of the transportation landscape

where we stand

  • transportation network control is real!

– Lyft/Uber operate giant network control systems

  • unified models for ridesharing

– guide for designing good online controls (pricing/rebalancing) – sandbox for studying more complex problems the big challenge

  • challenges of designing transit marketplaces

– impact of competing network platforms – the role of regulation – re-optimizing the network: transit routes, number of cars, etc.

22/22

slide-27
SLIDE 27

Thanks!

22/22