# Notes on Bus User Assignment Problem Using Section Network Representation Method
## 6 Discussion and Conclusions  
This paper provides a thorough analysis of a well-known transit assignment model in order to provide a thorough comprehension of it. Numerous research studies have been conducted after modifying equilibrium solution techniques or the passengers' behavior assumptions. According to the best of the author's knowledge, no research examines the presented model from the standpoint of a BNDP analyst. In spite of the fundamental logic in its passenger selection behavior, it is seldom called in the BNDP literature. This was the case for a variety of reasons; one of them may be that the graph formulation still hassignificant representation difficulties. The best-reported CPU time was 6.58 min utilizing a network of 570 stations and 34 lines [71], while [18] reported 0.24 min with a network consisting of just 6 lines and 24 nodes. These execution durations restrict the use of the proposed model as subroutines in the BNDP solution frameworks.  
Using the most recent contributions, BNDP solution techniques that require many consecutive assignments would counteract the running time explosion. In addition, the model does not limit the transfer number required to reach the destination. According to equilibrium conditions, the passenger would undertake the journey if capacity existed and the time impediment was feasible regardless of the required transfer number. Transfers could only be incorporated in the cost function as an additional impedance. Therefore, the model does not enable the designer to manage or monitor the transfer number in the final BNDP solution. In a poll conducted by [72] in the United States, almost sixty percent of respondents from various transport agencies felt that bus riders are only willing to make one transfer per journey. As standard assignment issues on road networks, they may be constructed as arc-based or roue-based models based on the requisite transit flow data (i.e., arc flow or route flow). To reach relatively rapid answers, equilibrium models are mostly link-based, eliminating the combinatorial process of entire route enumeration. Unfortunately, link-based methodologies do not allow the analyst to monitor the paths of network users. Route-based models, on the other hand, give path flow information, allowing the analyst to analyze the influence of the proposed BNDP design on a particular set of users. Furthermore, the assignment model has not been calibrated with the real passenger flow on a bus network. This calls to question the actual value of using a more complicated/sophisticated assignment scheme in the BNDP. Developing a realistic and efficient transit assignment model is still an open door for new contributions.  
Conceptualization, M.O.; data curation, A.A. and A.S.A.; formal analysis, M.O.; methodology, M.O.; resources, A.A. and A.S.A.; software, A.A. and A.S.A.; validation, M.O., A.A. and A.S.A.; writing--original draft, M.O.; writing--review and editing, A.A. and A.S.A. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.  
The authors would like to thank Deanship of Scientific Research at Majmaah University for supporting this work under Project Number No. R-2024-1046.  
Not applicable.  
The authors declare no conflicts of interest.