Difference in the handling of violations between xS1 and xS2

[innomedio]

Hello,

In xServer 1, the default cost for violated segments was 50000, but it could be changed. (https://svc-eu-n.cloud.ptvgroup.com/man ... Violations)
In xServer 2, the cost is no longer adjustable, but is now fixed at 150000. (https://xserver2.cloud.ptvgroup.com/das ... ns.enabled)
Is this the same behavior as if we had set the cost of violations to 150000 in xServer 1, or are there some other differences in the way violations are handled between the two API?

Best regards,
Benjámin

[Bernd Welter]

Well, the handling of violations has been reviewd and changed between xRoute1 and xRoute 2 on a significant level - therefore it makes sense to check this with you. The statement below is one of the major changes:

• In xRoute1 the costs of violations are applied per violated segment
• In xRoute2 the costs are for each “uninterrupted sequence of violated segments” (ok, it's more complex, but for the moment let's just focus on these differences).

As an example let’s look at the following structures of segments: 0 = not violated, 1 = violated (xroute 1 with 50’000 costs , xroute2 = 150’000):

• 01010 🡪 xRoute1 : 100’000, xRoute2: 300’000
• 01100 🡪 xRoute1 : 100’000, xRoute2: 150’000
• 01110 🡪 xRoute1 : 150’000, xRoute2: 150’000
• 0111110 🡪 xRoute1: 250’000, xRoute2: 150’000

Does this help you to decide how to use the violations in xRoute2?

[innomedio]

The example route is from
HU 2510 Dorog
->
HU 2518 Leányvár

In xS1, if we enabled the violations, we get a very short, 6 km route.

However under xS2, we also enabled the violations, yet we get a very long route, around 125 km.

I've attached some pictures from both of the routes and also attached the xS2 request.
I think that we're missing something is the xS2 request, but I just can't figure it out!

Please, check this for us!

Thank you so much,
Peter

[Maximilian Vogel]

Hi Peter,
can you provide more information on the xServer version and map, that you use? For both xServer 1 and 2. We would need that information to verify that it's not just data related.

Also, and I know that this is tedious to do since there is not always a direct mapping between xServer 1 and xServer 2 profiles, but can you verify, that there are no obvious and big differences between the profiles?

I ran your request with the current 2.34 on the 2025.1H map and the route that I get is not violated. In Dorog there are a lot of restrictions, but delivery vehicles just get a high penalty and not a violation. The penalty in this case is 2500.

I also noticed that you customized the network class penalties. Network classes 5 to 7 get a penalty of 2500. While I understand the reasoning, those are very high penalties, equally as high as the penalty for that truck attribute. As the route calculation optimizes for minimum costs, it tries to avoid such highly penalized segments. The higher the penalty, the bigger the possible detour.
Reducing the penalty for network class 5 to, for example, 1000 gives a shorter route with a local detour. It's not the same as in xRoute 1, but a lot better.

Best regards