ANALYSIS AND DATA PROCESSING SYSTEMS

The paper discusses the problem of optimal regulation of aircraft assignments for airline flights. Due to the fact that the activities of the airline are subject to changes caused by both external and internal environment, the planned schedule needs continuous management and control. In the event when the actual flight schedule deviates from the planned one, it is necessary to promptly make a decision on adjusting (restoring) the schedule and reassigning aircraft. Operational schedule management involves making adjustments to the current schedule from a depth of several hours to several days. The solution to the problem is to determine the unambiguous correspondence of flights and specific aircraft subject to maximizing the likelihood of meeting production targets and observing a number of restrictions. The task of managing airline schedules belongs to the class of scheduling optimization problems for parallel-sequential systems studied within the scheduling theory. It is NP-hard and requires the development of computationally efficient solution algorithms. However, the issue of choosing criteria for the optimization problem deserves special attention, since the correct choice plays an essential role in terms of assessing the effectiveness of decision-making. In the theory of decision-making, no general method for choosing the optimality criteria has been found. The definition of the target criterion depends on the expectations of the production. Within the framework of this paper, an original criterion is proposed for constructing an optimal solution to the discrete problem of managing aircraft assignments, the main idea of which is to find a balance between the duration of the schedule and the number of flights with a negative deviation from the planned schedule by assessing the level of punctuality violation risk. The paper gives a detailed concept of punctuality, describes an approach to assessing the level of risk, and also proposes an original formal formulation of the task of operational management of aircraft assignments based on the criterion of minimizing the risk of violation of flight punctuality.

1. Rushmeier R.A., Hoffman K.L., Padberg M. Recent advances in exact optimization of airline scheduling problems. Technical Report. George Mason University, 1995.

2. Naumova D.A. Metodiki otsenki regulyarnosti poletov kompanii [Evalution of the regularity of flights of airlines]. Nauchnyi Vestnik Moskovskogo gosudarstvennogo tekhnicheskogo universiteta grazhdanskoi aviatsii = Civil Aviation High Technologies, 2012, no. 187, pp. 90–93.

3. Simonyan T.V., Dovgaleva M.V. Sovremennyi metod izmereniya loyal'nosti klientov Net Promoter Score [The modern method of measuring customer loyalty]. Nauchnyi al'manakh = Science almanac, 2016, no. 1-1 (15), pp. 267–272. DOI: 10.17117/na.2016.01.01.267.

4. GOST R ISO 31000–2019. Menedzhment riska. Printsipy i rukovodstvo [State standard 31000:2019. Risk management – Principles and guidelines]. Moscow, Standartinform Publ., 2020.

5. GOST R 58771–2019. Menedzhment riska. Tekhnologii otsenki riska [State standard 58771:2019. Risk management – Risk assessment techniques]. Moscow, Standartinform Publ., 2020.

6. Korotchenko E.A., Petrunina Yu.L. The method of risk assessment "Criteria. Events. Rules". International Journal of Open Information Technologies, 2016, vol. 4, no. 5, pp. 52–58. (In Russian).

7. Jarrah A.I.Z., Yu G., Krishnamurthy N., Rakshit A. A decision support framework for airline flight cancellations and delays. Transportation Science, 1993, vol. 27, no. 3, pp. 266–280. DOI: 10.1287/trsc.27.3.266.

8. Cao J.M., Kanafi A. Real-time decision support for integration of airline flight cancellations and delays. Pt. I: Mathematical formulation. Transportation Planning and Technology, 1997, vol. 20, no. 3, pp. 183–199. DOI: 10.1080/03081069708717588.

9. Talluri K.T. Swapping applications in a daily airline fleet assignment. Transportation Science, 1996, vol. 30, no. 3, pp. 237–248.

10. Yan S., Yang D.-H. A decision support framework for handling schedule perturbation. Transportation Research. Part B: Methodological, 1996, vol. 30, no. 6, pp. 405–419.

11. Yan S., Tu Y.P. Multifleet routing and multistop flight scheduling for schedule perturbation. European Journal of Operational Research, 1996, vol. 103, pp. 155–169. DOI: 10.1016/S0377-2217(96)00260-3.

12. Lou S., Yu G. On the airline schedule perturbation problem caused by the ground delay program. Transportation Science, 1997, vol. 31, no. 4, pp. 298–311. DOI: 10.1287/trsc.31.4.298.

13. Arguello M.F., Bard J.F., Yu G. A GRASP for aircraft routing in response to grounding and delays. Journal of Combinatorial Optmization, 1997, vol. 5, pp. 211–228.

14. Bard J.F., Yu G., Arguello M.F. Optimizing aircraft routings in response to groundings and delays. IIE Transactions, 2001, vol. 33, no. 10, pp. 931–947. DOI: 10.1023/A:1010987008497.

15. Thengvall B.G., Bard J.F., Yu G. Balancing user preferences for aircraft schedule recovery during irregular operations. IIE Transactions. 2000, vol. 32, iss. 3, pp. 181–193. DOI: 10.1023/A:1007618928820.

16. Rosenberger J.M., Johnson E.L., Nemhauser G.L. Rerouting aircraft for airline recovery. Transportation Science, 2003, vol. 37, no. 4, pp. 408–421.

17. Andersson T., Varbrand P. The flight perturbation problem. Transportation Planning and Technology, 2004, vol. 27, no. 2, pp. 91–118. DOI: 10.1080/0308106042000218195.

18. Mezentsev Yu.A., Korotkova Yu.L., Estraich I.V. Zadacha i instrumenty optimal'nogo regulirovaniya raspisanii flota aviakompanii [Problem and tools for optimal regulation of airline fleet schedules]. Informatsionnye tekhnologii = Information Technologies, 2020, vol. 26, no. 8, pp. 450–459. DOI: 10.17587/it.26.450-459.