Assume each link delay is continuous and nondecreasing. Define the Beckmann potential on feasible route flows byThe integral of a nondecreasing function is convex, so is a convex function. The chain rule givesAt a minimum, move a small amount of flow from a used route to any other route for the same source-sink pair. This is a feasible direction, and its one-sided derivative is . Thus every used route has minimum cost, establishing the Wardrop equilibrium conditions.
Conversely, if satisfies the Wardrop equilibrium conditions, then for any feasible ,Here on each pair, whereas . The supporting inequality for a convex function then gives . ThereforeThe feasible route-flow set is compact, and the Beckmann potential is continuous, so a minimizer exists. If each is strictly increasing, the potential is strictly convex as a function of link loads. Two minimizers with distinct link-load vectors would have a midpoint with strictly smaller potential, a contradiction. Thus equilibrium link loads are unique in this case; route-flow nonuniqueness at a Wardrop equilibrium can still occur because different route decompositions can have the same link loads.
The optimization of selfish route choice must be distinguished from the minimization of total travel timeFor differentiable delays, the marginal social cost on link is , rather than just . The marginal external cost toll makes each traveler's perceived link cost equal to this derivative. If is convex, the tolled Wardrop equilibria minimize : the corresponding Beckmann potential is exactly , up to its zero reference value. Convexity of is an additional assumption and does not follow merely from nondecreasing delays.
An elastic-demand extension assigns pair an inverse demand function and allows demand to vary. Subtracting from the Beckmann potential produces the optimization formulation: its marginal condition equates minimum route delay with marginal willingness to travel on positive-demand pairs. With decreasing inverse demands, the subtracted utility is concave and the resulting objective remains convex. This explains why both fixed-demand route choice and an elastic-demand Wardrop equilibrium fit a common optimization framework.
Articles by others on the same topic
There are currently no matching articles.