Reference implementation · cases 01 and 02
Valencia, UPV Vera. One corridor, one hour, twice.
Two exhibits that must always travel together and in this order. The first shows the plan being built; the second shows one thing breaking and only that thing being rebuilt. The second claim is unreadable without the first, because nobody can see that forty-four route sheets were left alone unless they saw the forty-seven.
Case 01 · grouping and aggregation
340 commitments become 47 journeys, and no vehicle is bought
Compromisos recibidos
| reserva | zona | tot_pax | hora_pup | sillaruedas |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RSV-4471 | Tarongers | 2 | 08:05 | N |
| RSV-4472 | Tarongers | 1 | 08:05 | N |
| RSV-4473 | Serradora | 3 | 08:10 | S |
| RSV-4474 | Cabanyal | 1 | 07:55 | N |
| RSV-4475 | Tarongers | 2 | 08:20 | N |
| … | … | … | … | … |
Agrupadores formados
| agrupador | tot_pax | criterio |
|---|---|---|
| AGR-VLC-112 | 9 | zona + franja |
| AGR-VLC-113 | 14 | zona + franja |
| AGR-VLC-114 | 6 | zona + accesible |
| AGR-VLC-118 | 9 | zona + franja |
| … | … | … |
No agrupado
Politica de accesibilidad: excepcion, no se degrada el servicio.
Queda para asignacion directa.
Resultado de planeacion
Sin coordinar
Case 01 · Valencia UPV Vera · campus exit peak, Tuesday 07:40–08:40 · grouping and aggregation
Source: agrupador, tot_pax, hora_pup, sillaruedas, unidades_utilizadas, unidades_rentadas, factor_ocupacion, factor_directos, retraso_estimado
Three hundred and forty separate commitments enter, and forty-seven journeys leave. The commitments were never routes: they are people with an origin zone, an hour and a constraint. Compatible demand is grouped before any route exists, and that is the step which separates this from a routing optimiser, which begins after somebody has already decided what the routes are.
The result object separates unidades_utilizadas from unidades_rentadas, forty-one owned and six hired. The plan knows what it costs, not only what it achieves.
And one commitment is refused. RSV-4489 requires a wheelchair platform and no group in the window has a unit with one, so it is not squeezed into a journey that cannot serve it. The accessibility constraint wins against the optimisation, which is a policy decision expressed in code, in 2016.
Case 02 · affected-subspace repair
Same corridor, same hour. Three sheets change, forty-four do not.
Incidencia
Busqueda de hojas compatibles
| hoja_ruta | plazas | pax_previstos | disp. | +9 | hora_salida | resultado |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| HR-VLC-052 | 64 | 58 | 6 | 67 | 08:14 | FAIL plazas |
| HR-VLC-063 | 38 | 27 | 11 | 36 | 08:16 | PASS |
| HR-VLC-074 | 72 | 69 | 3 | 78 | 08:11 | FAIL plazas |
| HR-VLC-081 | 44 | 31 | 13 | 40 | 08:31 | FAIL hora |
Filtro 2 · hora_salida_estimada < hora_pup → 08:31 es posterior a 08:22.
HR-VLC-081 tiene plazas de sobra y aun asi se descarta: sale tarde.
Seleccionada HR-VLC-063, unica que pasa los dos filtros.
Alcance de la reparacion
Sin tocar
| hoja_ruta | status_hruta | pax |
|---|---|---|
| HR-VLC-041 | En operacion | 42 |
| HR-VLC-044 | En operacion | 37 |
| HR-VLC-047 | Esperando inicio | 28 |
| HR-VLC-051 | En operacion | 51 |
| … 40 mas | — | — |
Registro del cambio
Case 02 · Valencia UPV Vera · same corridor and hour, incident on Tarongers · affected-subspace repair
Source: plazas_disponibles = plazas − pax_previstos, pax_previstos ≤ plazas, hora_salida_estimada < hora_pup, motivo_reasignacion_guia, motivo_reasignacion_conductor
One corridor blocks and nine passengers lose their journey. The system does not recompute the morning. It asks a narrower question: which existing sheets still have room, once this group is added to them, and it answers by refusing three of four candidates.
Two fail on capacity and one on timing. The refusals are the interesting part: a system that shows only its successes is a demonstration, and a system that shows what it rejected and why is an instrument.
Forty-four sheets are untouched and they are on the screen, in grey, because that is the claim. Anyone can reassign a passenger. Doing it without disturbing the rest of a live operation is what makes orchestration deployable in a city rather than only in a simulation.
And the change carries two typed reasons, one from the dispatcher and one from the driver, recorded separately. The route did not simply change. It changed for a reason with a name attached to a role, which is what an authority needs when the question arrives in public.
Why the pair is the unit. Case 02 alone reads as a reassignment, which is unremarkable. It becomes affected-subspace repair only against case 01, where the reader has already counted forty-seven. The two exhibits are one argument in two frames, and they should never be separated, reordered, or published apart.