An ABC item earlier this month says that AI-based large language models like Chat GPT could help plan cities. An Age article says that AI bots could help slim down the Victorian public service. That's topical given the state government is looking for savings with its Silver review due to report this month.
So for fun I gave ChatGPT a task:
Describe a reformed bus network for the Box Hill area with a list of main routes and the roads they travel on.
This is the response, pasted verbatim, including formatting.
🚌 Proposed Key Bus Routes for Box Hill Area
Route 1: Box Hill – Deakin University – Burwood Station (University Link)
-
Primary Purpose: High-frequency link to Deakin University
-
Roads: Whitehorse Rd → Elgar Rd → Riversdale Rd → Station St (Burwood)
-
Frequency: Every 10 min peak / 15 min off-peak
Route 2: Box Hill – Doncaster Shoppingtown via Station St
-
Primary Purpose: Cross-suburban shopping and employment access
-
Roads: Station St → Doncaster Rd
-
Frequency: Every 10–15 min
Route 3: Box Hill – Blackburn – Forest Hill – Vermont South
-
Primary Purpose: East–west connector through middle suburbs
-
Roads: Whitehorse Rd → Blackburn Rd → Canterbury Rd → Burwood Hwy
-
Frequency: Every 15 min
Route 4: Box Hill – Surrey Hills – Camberwell
-
Primary Purpose: Local access and feeder to Camberwell Station
-
Roads: Whitehorse Rd → Union Rd → Riversdale Rd
-
Frequency: Every 20 min
Route 5: Box Hill – Mitcham – Ringwood
-
Primary Purpose: East–west orbital route
-
Roads: Whitehorse Rd → Springvale Rd → Maroondah Hwy
-
Frequency: Every 15 min
Route 6: Box Hill – Donvale – Ringwood North
-
Primary Purpose: North-east local connector
-
Roads: Elgar Rd → Wetherby Rd → Mitcham Rd → Warrandyte Rd
-
Frequency: Every 30 min (coverage route)
Route 7: Box Hill – Glen Waverley
-
Primary Purpose: South-east orbital route, university + train link
-
Roads: Elgar Rd → Highbury Rd → Springvale Rd → Kingsway (Glen Waverley)
-
Frequency: Every 15 min
Route 8: Box Hill – Balwyn – Kew – Clifton Hill
-
Primary Purpose: North–south route into inner suburbs
-
Roads: Whitehorse Rd → Balwyn Rd → Harp Rd → High St
-
Frequency: Every 20 min
🚏 Supporting Feeder & Local Routes
-
Shorter, less frequent routes feeding into Box Hill and key train stations.
-
Potential local shuttles to areas like Greensborough, Mont Albert North, Forest Hill Chase, etc.
🎯 Network Features
-
Simplified, straight routes with fewer deviations.
-
Clockface frequencies for ease of use.
-
Improved weekend & evening services.
-
Integration with trains and trams, especially at Box Hill, Glen Waverley, and Camberwell.
- Direct access to major trip generators like Deakin University, Box Hill Hospital, and shopping centres.
Chat GPT's map
You could request a map. The output gave me a Python script. I wanted to bypass this for an image I could present directly. That required me to log in to ChatGPT.
The result was what you see below (click for a better view). There is no geographical accuracy. Eg Ringwood North is shown south of Camberwell and a long way from Ringwood while Glen Waverley is north-east of Doncaster.
My map of 8 main routes
Using the written route descriptions I tried to make a map that was geographically accurate with regards to Box Hill, route termini and streets the routes would run along. That proved a challenge as some route descriptions lacked sufficient detail to make their paths unambiguous. My best attempt is below:
Quick comments on each are as follows:
1. Box Hill - Burwood station. Alignment is good between Box Hill and Deakin Uni, being similar to existing popular routes. However Burwood station on the quiet Alamein line is a weak terminus. Also this section of the route would overlap the longer and more frequent 75 tram so you wouldn't' do it. .
2. Box Hill - Doncaster. An useful and direct connection this segment is currently served by the much longer 903 orbital. If it was linked to the Route 1 proposed above it would match a longer section of the 903.
3. Box Hill - Vermont South. Has similarities with the existing 732 but is shorter and goes along more of Whitehorse Rd.
4. Box Hill - Camberwell. A route with benefits for Surrey Hills but it inefficiently overlaps too much of the 70 tram on Riversdale Rd.
5. Box Hill - Ringwood. Description here is ambiguous (with mention of Springvale Rd) but I've understood it to mean a direct Whitehorse Rd/Maroondah Hwy route. Not without merit despite it paralleling a rail line as there are a large number of destinations along the highway. Existing routes like 271, 279 and 901 serve this section but not continuously. There may be a case to be splitting Route 901 at Ringwood and South Morang and rethinking what happens in between. That might include a Box Hill - Ringwood route on the highway.
6. Box Hill - Ringwood North. The route description was not clear so what you see on the map is possibly not what was intended. This was described as a coverage route with a 30 min frequency (most of the others were every 15 min).
7. Box Hill - Glen Waverley. The alignment and the frequency is good in that, combined with Route 1, this would provide a 7.5 minute frequency between Box Hill station and Deakin University. The current network does not provide a direct Box Hill to Glen Waverley bus as one would not add a lot of new coverage. However it does link two major activity centres. This concept has similarities with a Liberal election promise in 2022 which may be where ChatGPT got the idea.
8. Box Hill - Clifton Hill. Alignment again not clear, especially at Clifton Hill end. Parts have similarities with existing Route 302 (though this goes into the city).
The above was the first network option that came up. Had I asked ChatGPT a different question or given it guidance the result will have been different.
Conclusion
This (free) version of ChatGPT AI has a way to go when it comes to designing bus networks.
But more advanced paid types with more data input and other guidance may produce more sensible networks.
Or, given the planning and scheduling software already used in the industry like HASTUS and Remix maybe an AI plug-in to enhance its planning function is how this will evolve in the future?
What about other applications for AI in transport? AI can give reasonable answers for things like customer feedback. Maybe even journey planning. It might help with advocacy or submission writing, like I tried here.
However the AI you get when you do a Google search can mix things up. For instance when I did various searches on the Bus Plan the result conflated official and unofficial sources, such as from DTP and my blog. Personally I would love the day that a lazy official, unaware of this, produces a report that includes slabs of my blog as official policy.
The old saying is 'Garbage In, Garbage Out'. Proper use of AI possibly means that its search be limited to official and verified sources rather than what just anyone says. Though DTP/PTV data can be wrong so an official source is not by itself a guarantee of correctness. AI risks just exacerbating existing errors. AI also needs a knowledgeable driver - that is people using it need to be learned enough that they can spot an error and correct.
Comments on AI's potential role in transport are appreciated and can be left below.
See other Useful Network items here
4 comments:
A Large Language Model isn't really the sort of AI which can come up with good bus routes - it's designed to be derivative rather than creative, so all it will do is build route descriptions by rehashing other people's route descriptions. Sort of like all the armchair experts did back in the Railpage days...
The value of LLMs is going to be as a way of inputting requests into existing tools - for example you might be able to tell it "find me a way to serve trip generator X with no additional driver shifts" and it could look at ways to extend other routes to do the job while cutting running time based on traffic condition data to meet the requirement for driver shifts.
On that note though, it has to be given hard rules about what's off limits. I'm told an AI weapon system decided (in a simulation thankfully) to kill its own command centre because the command centre was telling it the rules of engagement and it didn't want to obey them. In my scenario, the AI would probably try to get a new route into existing driver shifts by forcing drivers to work 24 hours a day with no breaks...
Honestly not bad for AI, but it does seem to ignore the existence of existing routes that don't serve Box Hill.
According to my decoding of the routes...
Route 1 is basically a 767-903-732 hybrid - note that Station St is the one immediately east of Deakin Uni (e.g. more "Box Hill South" than "Burwood"), not to be confused with Station Ave which is located on the east side of Burwood station (which is oddly considered "Glen Iris"; ironically Glen Iris proper doesn't have a Station- or Railway-named street)
Route 2 is solely the 903
Route 3 is a 271-765-703-732 mishmash but skips major trip generator Forest Hill Chase
Route 4 is 109-612-70, which is fairly pointless as it mostly duplicates trams (which were probably not on the AI's radar as it was specifically looking at buses), although Union Rd desperately needs something better than the 612's current frequency and near-nonexistence on the weekend - maybe even skipping Box Hill for a one-seat Camberwell-Doncaster service via Union/Belmore/Elgar to make up for the 285 being truncated at Park & Ride (the 285 duplicated the much more frequent 907)
Route 5 is 271-901, kind of wish the 670 did this but it requires splitting the 901 and doubling the 670's weekend frequency which is beyond the scope of DTP's glacial "oily rag" bus reform
Route 6 is a 281-907-271 mishmash, probably a bit too much; the current 271 is long enough as it is (IIRC there were plans to turn the Donvale-Ringwood North end into a less-frequent 371 to make the Box Hill section more frequent, much like what happened with the 270/370 split, might have been killed off alongside the Transdev greenfields reform)
Route 7 follows the 767 then creates a new route along transport desert Highbury Rd before duplicating half a dozen buses including the 902 up Springvale Rd
Route 8 is 109-285-302-207-246(!), of which only the 285 sticks out in its service levels (and lack thereof)
Existence of existing. Yeah, I didn't cut enough when rewording older sentence, which should have been "does seem to ignore existing routes that don't serve Box Hill" (as opposed to, "the existence of routes").
There are certainly things that AIs can already do, such as:
"Sure—here’s a draft press release in a professional style appropriate for the Department of Transport, Victoria, Australia:
⸻
MEDIA RELEASE
Date: [Insert Date]
Craigieburn Line: Interpeak Service Frequency Update
The Department of Transport acknowledges community interest in increasing interpeak train frequencies on the Craigieburn line. We understand reliable and frequent services are vital to keeping Victoria moving.
Why interpeak frequency cannot be increased beyond three trains per hour at this time
Currently, interpeak services on the Craigieburn line operate at a frequency of three trains per hour. There are several reasons why increasing this frequency is not feasible in the short term:
1. Network Capacity Constraints
• The Craigieburn line shares key sections of track—including the City Loop and North Melbourne corridor—with multiple other Metro lines.
• During the interpeak period, essential maintenance and network rebalancing activities occur to ensure safe and reliable peak operations. This includes track inspections, signalling maintenance and planned works that cannot be completed overnight alone.
2. Rolling Stock and Fleet Availability
• A significant proportion of the train fleet is scheduled for maintenance during interpeak hours to maintain safety standards and ensure the availability of trains during the morning and afternoon peaks.
• Additional services would require either delaying this maintenance or procuring additional rolling stock, which is not currently funded.
3. Passenger Demand Levels
• Current data indicates that interpeak patronage on the Craigieburn line remains below the capacity provided by three trains per hour.
• Increasing frequency in low-demand periods would divert resources from higher-priority areas across the network.
4. Operational and Staffing Requirements
• Additional interpeak services would necessitate more drivers, network controllers and support staff during a time when rostering is focused on peak readiness.
• This would have flow-on impacts to service reliability and cost-efficiency across the wider network.
Future Planning
We are committed to delivering better services as demand grows. Planned investments in the Metro Tunnel and network upgrades will improve capacity on the Craigieburn line over the coming years. The Department regularly reviews service levels to ensure they reflect patronage trends, operational feasibility and value for money.
We thank passengers for their understanding and encourage all customers to plan their travel using updated timetables and live service information available via PTV channels.
For further information, please visit www.ptv.vic.gov.au or call 1800 800 007.
Media Contact:
Department of Transport Media Team
[Insert Contact Details]
⸻
If you’d like, I can help you tailor this further for a specific audience or communication channel."
Post a Comment