FA-67314 / Railway interlocking logic / Member archive

Automatic route setting arbitration: same route exclusion · case 04

The same route is granted to two trains.

Member previewVariant 4 · 3 implementations · 8 checks per implementation

Case contract

Trains whose eta is at most lookahead_s after now are candidates, including overdue trains (eta before now). Candidates are ordered by class (1 highest), then scheduled time, then id. Routes are granted greedily in that order; a candidate is skipped if its route equals or conflicts with (conflict pairs are unordered) any route already granted. Return granted train ids in grant order.

Why this case matters

Interlocking logic decides whether trains may be given authority; a wrong decision at this point either grants unsafe movements or strands traffic.

One recorded failure

Sample boundary fixture

This sample comes from the broken implementation of a controlled reproducer.

Boundary fixture	Actual	Expected	Outcome
regression: two trains for one route	`["1A01", "1A02"]`	`["1A01"]`	Failed

MEMBER ARCHIVE

The complete case is available to members.

This record includes three runnable implementations, regression fixtures, execution results, and source hashes.

Member access is invitation-based. Sign in with your invited account to inspect the sources.