SDM5002 - Bus Transport in Singapore Report

8/14/2019 SDM5002 - Bus Transport in Singapore Report

1/21

SDM 5002 SYSTEMS ENGINEERING

BUS TRANSPORT IN SINGAPORE

TEAM MEMBERS

CHONG KHAI SIN HT072850H

GOH SIONG TECK HT072853R

HOSSAM EL SHENAWY HT072894R

LIM CHING WU, LESLIE HT063039Y

LIM CHUN PENG, ALVIN HT063324Y

TAN SUNG CHYN HT062932E


2/21

Divis ion of Engineer ing & Technology Management

SDM5002 System Engineering

2

CONTENTS

1.INTRODUCTION..............................................................................................3

Soft Systems Methodology...........................................................................3Singapore Bus System ..................................................................................3

2. SOFT SYSTEMS METHODOLOGY PROCESS STEPS.................................53. APPLYING SSM TO THE SINGAPORE BUS SYSTEM CASE ......................7

Descriptive Scenario Questions ...................................................................7Normative scenario questions......................................................................8Root Definition Statement #1: .....................................................................12Conceptual Model based on Root Definition #1 ........................................12Comparison between conceptual model #1 and real situation ................13Root Definition Statement #2 ......................................................................13Comparison between conceptual model #2 and real situation ................15

4. LESSONS LEARNED & TEAM DYNAMICS.................................................185.

CONCLUSION...............................................................................................20

REFERENCES ...................................................................................................21


3/21



3

1. INTRODUCTION

SOFT SYSTEMS METHODOLOGY

Peter Checkland at Lancaster University developed Soft SystemsMethodology (SSM) in the 1960s. The methodology was developed toaddress difficulties in solving complex, dynamic and multi perspective socialproblems using traditional hard systems engineering principles such asOperations Research (OR).

SSM is a participative process of enquiry that stimulates thinking about thereal word situation. Through the enquiry process, the method formulates aroot definition, which describes what the system should do in an ideal view. Aroot definition is developed on the basis of a certain world-view. There can bemultiple world-views, which will yield multiple root definitions.

Subsequently, an idealized conceptual model is built based on the rootdefinition. The conceptual model incorporates all the activities that arenecessary to fulfill the requirements of the root definition. This conceptualmodel is then compared to the perceived reality with the aim of highlightingkey differences between the systems where changes can be made forimprovements.

SINGAPORE BUS SYSTEM

The bus system in Singapore provides a means of public travel for themasses with over two million rides taken daily. There are two main operatorsin this system, SBS Transit and SMRT Corporation. The two operators servedesignated areas of operation, and plan the bus routes based on commercialconsiderations, subject to minimum service obligations. Bus routes can bebroadly categorized into Trunk (routes that ply between towns) and Feeder(Operating within neighborhoods).

As reported in the 2008 Land Transport Review study, key criticisms of thesystem include long waiting time, erratic bus arrivals, circuitous feeders and

overcrowding. This has led to a situation where out of more than 250 busservices; only 35% are run at intervals of 10 minutes or less.

The recent transport initiative addresses primarily on vehicle congestion, roadpricing and public transport service standards. There will be a road expansionprogram with plans to improve expressways (CTE/TPE), building roads forfuture and upgrading of road interchanges. Given our limited land space, theroad network expansion will reduce over the next 15 years. As a result, it isplanned to reduce vehicle growth rate from 3% to 1.5% and the increase intravel demand must be met largely by public transport. The effectiveness ofcongestion /road pricing system will be enhanced by refining the

measurement of traffic speeds and revision of the ERP rate structure. Effortsare also planned to manage congestion in city area.


4/21



4

The key public transport initiative is to make public transport a choice made.The bus and rail will be planned as an integrated system from commutersviewpoint, with more frequent services and seamless transfers expected.

There will be expansion to the rail network. Bus services will be affectedgreatly where LTA will undertake centralized bus network planning.Improvements will be made to the fare system, travel information, transporthub and road priority measures. Feeder and premium bus service is alsotargeted for improvements. Some of the details are listed below:

Distance-based through fares to facilitate transfers More integrated public transport service information More integrated public transport hubs More bus priority measures to speed up buses and improve

timeliness Bus services will be allowed to duplicate routes along sections of

North-South and East-West lines with heavy passenger loading,giving commuters more choices

Increasing Basic Bus Service Frequencies On corridors affected by ERP, all bus services will have peak

period frequencies of no more than 12 min by June 08 and10 min by Aug 09

Frequency for feeder buses will be increased to allow quickerconnections to MRT stations and bus interchanges

Expand premium bus services to corridors affected by ERP (byJune 08)

New services will link more residential areas (Punggol,Katong, Balestier, Holland, Choa Chu Kang, Yishun) to cityareas (Shenton Way, Suntec City and Orchard Road)

Return trips in the evenings for high demand services


5/21



5

2. SOFT SYSTEMS METHODOLOGY PROCESS STEPS

The steps of SSM consist of seven stages.

Stage 1: Enter the real-world situation considered problematicThis stage aims to capture the main data and information on the situation.Methods used are both formal and informal, including examination of writtenrecords, interviews and direct observation.

Stage 2: Expressing the problem situationThe findings from the first stage are summarized in a rich picture. This istypically a cartoon-like sketch or diagrammatic representation of the currentsituation.

Stage 3: Formulating Root DefinitionsA root definition is an idealized view of the system. Checkland designed themnemonic CATWOE to ensure that root definitions are well defined. The mainportion of the root definition is the Transformation process, which describesthe purposeful activity that changes some defined input into some definedoutput.Use it when seeking to implement the solution, to help consider the impact onthe people involved. CATWOE stands for:

C = Customers

Who is on the receiving end?What problem do they have now?How will they react to what you are proposing?Who are the winners and losers?

A = ActorsWho are the actors who will 'do the doing', carrying out your solution?What is the impact on them?How might they react?

T = Transformation processWhat is the process for transforming inputs into outputs?What are the inputs? Where do they come from?What are the outputs? Where do they go?What are all the steps in between?

W = World View (Weltanschauung)What is the bigger picture into which the situation fits?What is the real problem you are working on?What is the wider impact of any solution?


6/21



6

O = OwnerWho is the real owner or owners of the process or situation you are

changing?Can they help you or stop you?

What would cause them to get in your way?What would lead them to help you?

E = Environmental constraintsWhat are the broader constraints that act on the situation and your

ideas?What are the ethical limits, the laws, financial constraints, and limited

resources? Regulations, and so on?How might these constrain your solution? How can you get around

them?

Stage 4: Building Conceptual ModelsThis step models the ideal system using the five Es as criteria: Efficacy(whether it will work); Efficiency (whether it will work with minimum resources);Effective (whether it helps to achieve the higher-level aim); Elegance (whetherit is beautiful) and Ethicality (whether it is moral).

Stage 5: Comparing models and realityThe conceptual model is then compared with the current system. This can bedone by a series of questions such as whether activities in the model exist inthe current system etc.

Stage 6: Defining ChangeThis stage aims to define a change that is both systemically desirable andculturally feasible and the steps to effect the change.

Stage 7: Taking ActionThis stage completes SSM analysis by implementing the changes that areconsidered both desirable and feasible.


7/21



7

3. APPLYING SSM TO THE SINGAPORE BUS SYSTEM CASE

DESCRIPTIVE SCENARIO QUESTIONS

a) Who uses the bus system? And why? Social Class Perspective: Blue-Collar Workers, Middle Class. Ownership Perspective: Those who do not own a private car or cant drive. Economic Perspective: Those who cannot afford buying a private car, or those who

want to save money by riding bus to work. Demographic Perspective: Students, the elderly, the handicapped.

b) What kinds of buses are there? Who operates them? Large public listed companies (e.g. SBS Transit) Private small businesses.

c) What is the use of the bus system? Why cant we do away with it? It is an essential enabler to the national economy (efficient point

to point transportation system as long as the economy is largelydepending on jobs that stipulate physical presence.)

Environmentally demanded (limited space, pollution, energyconsumption.)

Provides greater reach than arterial means like MRT trains etc. Cheaper alternative to taxis.

d) What are the current features of the system? Are they good (or bad)? Towhat are they attributable?

Long route/ short route bus transport. Accessibility/ inaccessibility (tied to bus station location and bus

frequency, service not continuous in both space and time.) Air-con subsystem (climate control/ respiratory disease

transmission.)

Fare structure favors students and the elderly. Fossil fuel based.

e) Whats wrong with the current system? Are these symptoms? Or are theremore fundamental causes?

Service not continuous in both space and time (inherent). Pollution, climate control subsystem problems, etc. (can be

mitigated). Minimal control over external factors, road conditions, traffic

congestion. Affects service levels.


8/21



8

NORMATIVE SCENARIO QUESTIONS

a) What would an ideal bus system for year 2018 be like? Would there even

be one then? The ideal bus system has to satisfy the following criteria: Free of Charge. Service is continuous both in space and time. Responsive to real-time capacity changes. Optimizes travel time and distance for every passenger. Zero environmental pollution. Seamlessly connects to or subsumes other means of

transportation (e.g. air, train, etc.) Zero accident rate.

Healthy climate control system eliminates the risk of contractingrespiratory diseases.

100% secure (crisis and emergency response system.) Information service (about destination, weather, connections,

etc.) Comfortable. Used by everyone in the society. Used any time, reaches everywhere, i.e. continuous access both

in space and time. Doorstep delivery No limit on cargo (i.e. if I am carrying large parcels or pets, I can

and would take the bus) Possibly customizable routes, perhaps in times of low demand

b) There will be always a bus system as long as the needs for it do exist(economic/ environmental.)

There may not be a bus system if other personal transportmeans take off and become affordable and widely supported(e.g. Segway)

c) Who would be using the bus system? And why?

Everyone in society (as it becomes very convenient to use,population of Singapore would be around 5.5 mi). It may have already become the default mode of transport. i.e.

Private transportation is reduced through legislation or othermeasures.

d) What features/ functionalities are necessary and whats desirable?All features and functionalities mentioned in the ideal solution are

necessary. Even being free of charge which appears to be adesirable feature, remains necessary to make it attractive foreveryone to use.

e) How should a bus system be organized?


9/21



9

Publicly owned (competition entails fragmentation and the systembecomes difficult to manage and be integrated.)

Centrally planned.Seamlessly integrates with or subsumes other passenger

transport systems.

f) What technologies would be available? What would be the impact on thebus system?

Autonomous Car Technology (driverless).New cheap and clean energy sources.Artificial intelligence (in control subsystem).Superconductivity.Self-maintenance/ cleaning capabilities.Alternative fuels

Real-time and predictive info on arrivals etc.


10/21



10

STAGES 1 & 2: The team brainstormed the answers to the descriptivescenario questions. A rich picture is then derived torepresent the problem situation.

LONG/SHORT ROUTE ACCESSIBLE AIRCON SYSTEM FARE STRUCTURE FAVORS

STUDENTS AND ELDERLY

SBS

SMRT

PRIVATE BUSCOMPANIES

REGULATORS

COMMUTERS:

BLUE COLLAR WORKERS DO NOT OWN/CANNOT

AFFORD CAR

STUDENTS, ELDER,HANDICAPPED

INACCECESSIBLE IN TERMS OFSTATION LOCATION AND BUSFREQENCY

SERVICE NOT CONTINUOUS IN TIMEAND SPACE

FOSSIL FUEL BASED POLLUTION, CLIMATE CONTROL

SUBSYSTEM PROBLEMS

ESSENTIAL ENABLER TONATIONAL ECONMY

ENVIRONMENTALLY DEMANDED

NEEDSREVIEW


11/21



11

STAGE 3: The team then builds on the existing resources to attempt tocome out with a root definition by means of CATWOE analysis.

Keywords were focused on, analyzed and then summarized tobecome the root definition.

CUSTOMERS ACTORS TRANSFORMATIONPROCESS

WORLD VIEW OWNER ENVIRONMENTALCONSTRAINTS

Public Blue-collars Middle-class Non-car

owners Poor people

Dependents(Student /Elderly)

LTA Bus companies Vendors Comfort Delgro Shell Exxon Mobil

SMRT URA

Moving people

Input: Customersneeds to travel todestination.

Transformation:Customerstransported

Output: Customersneeds fulfilled andtransported todestination.

Cheaptransportationnetwork basedon routes.Accessible,commodity for

the massmarket.Averageservice withacceptablesafety andcomfortrequirements,congestionlevel andoperatinghours.

LTA Private

serviceproviders

Space Noise Emission Pollution Regulation Geography

Traffic (Other roadusers)

STAGES 4 AND 5: From the CATWOE analyses, the team then proceededto describe the system with one or more root definitions.After the development of the root definition, this idealsystem is then modeled using the five Es, namelyefficacy, efficiency, effectiveness, elegance and ethicality.

This conceptual system is then compared with thecurrent system in the real situation through aseries of questions pertaining to the activitiesoccurring in the system.

The team used a benchmarking approach and lookfor dramatic changes between the systems byfocusing on the key deliverables and practicality ofideas.


12/21



12

ROOT DEFINITION STATEMENT #1:

An affordable and regulated means of public transportation, which providesacceptable safety and comfortable service within existing space, legal and

traffic constraints.

CONCEPTUAL MODEL BASED ON ROOT DEFINITION #1

Measures of performance for the bus system: Efficacy: Are the passengers being transported to their desired

destinations? Efficiency: Are the passengers being served at a reasonable cost and

trip duration? Effectiveness: Does the bus system serve the transportation needs of

the masses? Elegance: Is the system comprehensive? Ethical: Is the transformation morally correct?

Maintain buses ingood operating

Providecomfortableenvironment

during commute

Transportpassenger to

destination

Provide safetyand protection

duringcommute

Plan staffingrequirements

Plan &schedule

routes

Setreasonablefare price

Observe and adhereto government and

environmentalregulations

Monitoractivities

Take controlaction


13/21



13

COMPARISON BETWEEN CONCEPTUAL MODEL #1 AND REALSITUATION

Activity Is it done in the realsituation? How?

Comments

Plan staffingrequirements

Service providersallocate staffingrequirementsaccording to demand

Cases of poor busconditions could be due topoor maintenanceplanning

Set reasonable fareprice

Fare is generallyaffordable, but fareincreases do not

always come withimproved service

Centralized (government)planning may regulatefares but remove price

competition for serviceimprovement.

Maintain buses in goodoperating condition

Service providers keepbuses regularlymaintained andcleaned

Breakdowns areoccasional and dirty busespossible.

Plan and scheduleroutes

Service providers planroutes according todemand after meetingminimum obligations

set by government

Overcrowding andbunching of buses point topoor planning andanticipation of traffic

conditions.Observe and adhere togovernmental andenvironmentalregulations

Road system isregulated by LTA.Buses are at leastEuro III.

Some Euro (IV) busesnewly introduced, but allstill remain fossil fuelbased.

Provide safety andprotection duringcommute

Buses give moderateprotection in event ofaccidents.

Low floor aidsembarking/disembarking.No seat belts.

Provide comfortableenvironment during

commute

Air-conditioned,cushioned seats,

damped rides.

Overcrowding affectscomfort levels

Transport passenger todestination

Passengers embarkand disembark at busstops.

Reach of bus network canbe improved.

ROOT DEFINITION STATEMENT #2

A transportation system to provide mass transit through managing fleets ofbuses, in order to move people safely & comfortably at affordable pricesunder legal and traffic constraints.


14/21



14

Conceptual Model based on Root Definition #2

Measures of performance for the bus system:

Efficacy: Are the passengers being transported to their desireddestinations? Efficiency: Are the passengers being served at a reasonable cost and

trip duration? Effectiveness: Does the bus system serve the transportation needs of

the masses (comfort and safety)? Elegance: Is the transformation comprehensive? Ethical: Is the transformation morally correct?

Managing of resources $$

Purchasing busof choice

Setting of fares

Maintaining

of buses

Setting of busfrequency

Planning of routes

Choice to taking bus

Considerationof choices

Moving peopleFollowing trafficrules

Meeting statutorystandards

Acting to

remedy


15/21



15

COMPARISON BETWEEN CONCEPTUAL MODEL #2 AND REALSITUATION

Activity Is it done in the realsituation? How?

Comments

Managing of resources Service providersallocate resourcesbased on profitability

Often results in minimalperformance standardswith no social obligation

Planning of routes /Setting of busfrequency

Service providers planroutes according todemand & profitabilityafter meeting minimum

obligations set bygovernment

Overcrowding andbunching of buses pointto poor planning andanticipation of traffic

conditions.

Consideration ofchoices

MRT, taxi or privatecars are the otheroptions. MRT servesdifferent routes. Restsare not priced close tobe consideredsubstitutes.

Rising taxi fares makesthe price gap even wider.Cost of private carownership is alsoescalating due to higherERP, fuel and COE.

Choice of taking bus Wide reach of bus

network makes itfavorable.

Without price comparable

alternatives, manychoose to take busdespite all of itsshortcomings. Becominga case of make-do.

Meeting statutorystandards

LTA states maximumbus frequency andservice standards interms of comfort andsafety

Service provider usuallymeets LTAs standardsbut not commutersexpectations.

Moving people Passengers embarkand disembark at busstops.

Reach of bus networkcan be improved.


16/21



16

Stage 6: Possible solution based on SSM analysis

A possible solution based on the above analysis would draw heavily on therecent advances in Autonomous Car Technology (see picture and technology

overview below). The new driverless vehicles will allow the public bus systemto evolve into a more personalized one, where a large number of smallerdriverless vehicles, each with a typical capacity of 4 passengers, will replacethe conventional large-vehicle system.

Unlike their old predecessors, the new environmentally-friendly, electrically-powered vehicles will be able to stop anywhere along the roadside, and areavailable for use 24hrs/7 weekdays. After bringing its customers to the exactlocation they wished for, an autonomousvehicle will be able to choose its nextparking location, regroup or distribute with

other vehicles according to real-timefluctuations in demand. A parking vehiclewill make use of its idle time to recharge itsbatteries from the continuously availableelectrical power source along the roadside.Their movement will be confined to aspecially reserved two-lane partition on allroads nationwide. The public vehicles will be allowed to park, drop-off, andpick-up passengers from the lane next to the roadside. The other lane isreserved for the speeding vehicles. In the unlikely occasion of one vehiclesuffering from a breakdown, a nearby idle vehicle will be able to sense this

and will dock with it and tow it to the nearest service station.

A great part of the service cost, if not all of it, will be absorbed by advertisingrevenues. In-vehicle interactive advertisements can take the passengers withjust one click to the restaurant that offers their favorite dish, or enables themto buy discounted tickets to a movie that will start shortly, and the moviehouse is willing to accept a lower price for the tickets. The sky is the limit forpossible advertisement schemes in this new setting.

Technology Overview

Stanley is the name of the autonomous vehicle shown in the above picture.It is the result of collaborative efforts between Volkswagen's Palo AltoElectronic Research Laboratory, Volkswagen Research Centre (Germany)and Stanford University (US). It is only one example for success in the field ofAutonomous Car Technology. For other research in this field, please consultthe DARPA website below.

The development of Stanley began in July 2004. Dubbed a mobile high-techlaboratory, Stanley is built with a high-performance computer centre

consisting of six interconnected Intel Pentium M 1.6 GHz processors andIntel motherboards located in the vehicle's luggage compartment. The system


17/21



17

is managed by complex and unique software for steering, acceleration anddeceleration to control Stanley electronically via "drive-by-wire" systems thatreact to any special features of the Grand Challenge course route in real time.

In addition, Stanley's array of laser detectors, stereoscopic viewing devices,radar and Global Positioning Systems allowed it to find and follow theprescribed course route of the Grand Challenge, avoid obstacles as well asnegotiate turns while travelling at very high speeds.

While the vehicle is in motion, the environment is perceived through four laserrange finders, a radar system, a stereo camera pair, and a monocular visionsystem. All sensors acquire environment data at rates between 10 and 100Hertz. Map and pose information are incorporated at 10 Hz, enabling Stanleyto avoid collisions with obstacles in real-time while advancing along the 2005DARPA Grand Challenge and 2007 Urban Challenge routes.

The original robotic prototype vehicle, Stanley was on display at theSingapore Science Center from June to August 2007.

The DARPA (Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency) GrandChallenge 2005 held in the rigorous settings of the Mojave Desert wasdesigned to be a rigorous field test for Autonomous (Driverless) RoboticGround Vehicles. The aim of this robotic vehicle challenge and the DARPAUrban Challenge of November 2007 is to accelerate research anddevelopment into autonomous vehicles that can be deployed in battlefieldsituations, and may be in many other civilian applications in the future.


18/21



18

4. LESSONS LEARNED & TEAM DYNAMICS

In the course of applying SSM on the Singapore Bus system, team dynamics

played an important role, as there was insufficient domain expertise. Teammembers freely expressed their ideas frankly and vocally. All disagreementswere resolved through cordial exchange and sharing of opinions mindfullymaintaining focus on the subject matter. Due to the nature of SSM, the scopeof view in the project is wide with no specific constraints. As a result,enthusiasm often led us off-track and the discussion had to be re-directed.

The process arriving at the root definitions from the CATWOE was based ongeneral consensus. The approach used was systematic but with a systemicview using self-organizing debate. The team adopted a voting system whendefining keywords in the forming of the root definition. It is noted that there will

be different root definitions when there is different interpretation from differentpoint of view. Hence through brainstorming using the mnemonic CATWOE,discussions within the team lead to more than one root definition. Bearing inmind that the objective was not to arrive quickly at one correct answer, theteam proceeded to develop multiple root definitions and conceptual models.This allowed for differing views of the system to be captured. The teamgenerally found that SSM stimulates thinking in a concise and thoroughmanner.

Finally, it is clear from the two conceptual models that there is a missing linkbetween current system and ideal conceptual system. Below are the excerptsof the team dynamics and experience in the application of SSM:

Q: How would you benefit from seeing alternative descriptions?

A: The group will have a wider perspectives and a multi-dimensionalanalysis of the problematic real world situation.

Q: What would you do with the outcome? What's the next step?

A: The next step will be to apply the stages of SSM and iterate between

the stages in order to adapt to the different situations at different stages.

Q: Consider the process that your group took from the raw input tothe final form. Can you present an account of the evolution of

concepts? Consider the process of selection, negotiation,evaluation, and ranking.

A: (i) SelectionThe group brainstormed the answers to the descriptive scenarioquestions. A rich picture is then derived to represent the problemsituation. The group then builds on the existing resources to attempt to

come out with a root definition by means of CATWOE analysis.


19/21



19

Keywords were focused on, analyzed and then summarized to becomethe root definition.

(ii) Negotiation

There is cordial exchange and sharing of ideas. Vocal expression.

(iii) EvaluationAfter the development of the root definition, this ideal system is thenmodeled using the five Es, namely efficacy, efficiency, effectiveness,elegance and ethicality. This conceptual system is then compared withthe current system in the real situation through a series of questionspertaining to the activities occurring in the system. The group based ona benchmarking approach and look for dramatic changes between thesystems by focusing on the key deliverables and practicality of ideas.

(iv) RankingA scoring system was used.

Q: Can you describe the methodology that you used in generalterms? Can your methodology be recursively applied? Can it scale(in terms of level of detail)?

A: Soft System Methodology (SSM) was used in: Describing the current situation through perspective of major

stakeholders. Imagine an ideal solution. Defining the boundary of systems and draft out a diagrammatic

representation of the current problematic situation. Formulating an idealized view of the system Generating an ideal conceptual system Comparing the ideal system to current system

Q: What major difficulties were encountered? Gaps in frameworkobjects? In DS questions? Weakness in process steps? In outputsgenerated?

A: There is insufficient domain expertise. There seems to be a missing link between current system and ideal

conceptual system. CATWOE voting system was used to define keywords, which

eventually form the root definition. If keyword changes, statement willbe different. There will be different root definitions when there isdifferent interpretation from different point of views.

No incentive to compare between the process steps. Scope of project is too wide with no specific constraints.


20/21


21/21



REFERENCES1. Green, Stuart.D. and Simister, Stephen ,J. (1999) Modeling client

business processes as an aid to strategic briefing , Construction

Management and Economics, 17:1, 630-76

2. http://www-staff.it.uts.edu.au/~jim/bpt.ssm.html

3. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soft_systems_methodology

4. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bus_transport_in_Singapore

5. Speech By Mr. Raymond Lim, Minister For Transport And Second

Minister For Foreign Affairs, At The Launch Of The Land Transport

Gallery, 18 January 2008, 9.20 am

6. http://www.lta.gov.sg/corp_info/doc/190108.pdf

7. Systems Approach in the Land Transport, Presentation by Mr. Yam

Ah Mee, CEO of the Land Transport Authority (LTA), at the IES/DSTA

Systems Engineering Seminar, Orchard Hotel Singapore, 19 March

2008.

8. http://www.darpa.mil/grandchallenge

9. http://www.stanfordracing.org

10. http://cs.stanford.edu/group/roadrunner/

11. http://www.science.edu.sg

Date post:	30-May-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	lastsplash
View:	215 times
Download:	0 times

SDM5002 - Bus Transport in Singapore Report

Documents