Professional Documents
Culture Documents
MIT1 - 201JF08 - Lec05 (Travel Demand Modeling) PDF
MIT1 - 201JF08 - Lec05 (Travel Demand Modeling) PDF
Moshe Ben-Akiva
Fall 2008
Review
2
Outline
● Introduction
● Approaches
– Trip
– Tour
– Activity
● Emerging Approaches
3
Long Term Choices
● Urban Development
• Firm location and relocation decisions
• Firm investment in information technology
● Mobility and Lifestyle Decisions
• Labor force participation
• Workplace location
• Housing
• Automobile ownership
• Information technology ownership and access
• Activity program
4
Activity and Travel Pattern Choices
5
Modeling Framework
Land Use and Economic
Development Long Term
Transportation System
Performance Short Term
6
The Fundamental Modeling Problem
● Adequately represent a decision process that has an inordinate number
of feasible outcomes in many dimensions
● Example - Activity Schedule
N um b er of activities 10 10
S eq u enc e 10!
T im ing 1 0 p er activity 1 00
L oca tion 1 00 0 per activ ity 1 0,0 0 0
M o de 5 pe r activity 50
R oute 1 0 p er activity 1 00
T o tal N u m b er o f
A c tivity S ch e d u le A lte rn ative s 1 0 17
● Simplify
● Achieve valid results
7
Simplifying the Problem
● Discrete time intervals
● Individuals defined by socioeconomic variables
● Divide space into zones
● Categories of activities
● Depiction of travel patterns
• trips, tours, activity schedules
8
Approaches to Modeling Travel
● Trip-based
● Integrated trip-based
● Tour-based
● Activity schedule
9
Representing Activity/Travel Behavior
W W
W
S
S H S
H S
H
H H D
D D D
H H
H
Time Time Time
10
Trip-Based: The 4-Step Model
Trip Purpose
Home-based work (HBW)
Home-based shop (HBS)
Home-based other (HBO)
Non-home-based (NHB)
Behavioral Steps
1. Trip Generation (Frequency)
2. Trip Distribution (Destination)
3. Modal Split (Mode)
4. Assignment (Route)
11
The 4-Step Model: Trip Generation
● Trip Production
• Household Size, Household Structure, Income, Car
Ownership, Residential Density, Accessibility
● Trip Attractions
• Land-use and Employment by Category (e.g. Industrial,
Commercial, Services), Accessibility
● Cross Classification, Regression, Growth Factor
12
The 4-Step Model: Trip Distribution
● Trip matrix
Attractions
Generations 1 2 3 … j … J ∑T
j
ij
∑T ij
D1 D2 D3 … Dj … DJ ∑∑ Tij = T
i i j
13
The 4-Step Model: Trip Distribution
● Gravity Model
Tij = α i Oi β j D j f (Cij ) , i = 1.....I and j = 1.....J
∑T ij = Oi , i = 1.....I
j
∑T ij = Dj , j = 1.....J
i
• Where,
from i to j and
14
The 4-Step Model: Modal Split
● Logit
eVauto
P ( auto ) = Vauto Vtransit
e +e
● Nested Logit
e µI NM
P(NM ) = µI NM
e + e µI M
15
The 4-Step Model: Assignment
● Route Choice
– Deterministic: Shortest Path, Minimum Generalized Cost
– Stochastic: Discrete Choice (e.g. Logit)
● Equilibrium
– Supply Side
– User Equilibrium vs. System Optimal
16
Limitations of the Trip-Based Method
17
Complexity of Work Commute (Boston)
Simple Commute 23%
(no other activities) 36% Simple 40%
Simple Simple
home work
Complex Commute
(includes non-work activities) 64% 77% 60%
daycare Complex Complex Complex
home work
bank
Females with Males with
All Adults
Children Children
Source: Ben-Akiva and Bowman, 1998, “Activity Based Travel Demand Model Systems,” in Equilibrium and Advanced
Transportation Modeling, Kluwer Academic.
18
Complex Responses to Policies
Shop
Shop Shop
Source: Bowman, 1998, “The Day Activity Schedule Approach to Travel Demand Analysis,” PhD Thesis, MIT
19
Modeling Travel at the Level of the Individual
● Classic 4-step
– Trip Frequency
– Destination Choice
– Mode Choice
– Route Choice
● Beyond 4-step
– Time of Day
– Integrated Trips
– Tours
20
Integrated Trip-Based Framework
Auto ownership
Home
--HomeBased Work
based work tripstrips
21
Highlights of Integrated Trip-Based System
● Key features
– Disaggregate choice models
– Models are integrated, via conditionality and measures of
inclusive value, according to the decision framework
● Key weakness
– Modeling of trips rather than explicit tours
22
Tour-Based Framework (e.g. Stockholm)
Work Tours
Other Tours
Personal
Business
Business
Shopping Other
23
Highlights of Tour-Based System
● Key features
– Explicitly chains trips in tours
– Validated and widely applied
● Key weaknesses
– Lacks an integrated schedule pattern
– Doesn’t integrate well the time dimension
● Data requirements
– Same as for trip-based models
24
Basics of Activity-Based Travel Theory
● Travel demand is derived from demand for activities
● Tours are interdependent
● People face time and space constraints that limit their activity
schedule choice
● Activity and travel scheduling decisions are made in the context
of a broader framework
– Conditioned by outcomes of longer term processes
– Interacts with the transportation system
– Influenced by intra-household interactions
– Occurs dynamically with influence from past and anticipated
future events
25
Activity Schedule System
Activity Pattern
Tours
26
Activity Pattern
● Replaces trip and tour generation steps of trip and tour-based models
● Models number, purpose and sequence of tours
– Tours are interdependent
Source: Bowman, 1998, “The Day Activity Schedule Approach to Travel Demand Analysis,” PhD Thesis, MIT
27
Example of Activity Patterns
Portland, OR
28
Tours
● Primary Tour
– Primary and secondary destinations
– Timing
– Modes
● Secondary Tours
– Primary and secondary destinations
– Timing
– Modes
29
Model Structure
Activity Pattern
primary activity/tour type,
#/purpose secondary tours
Primary Tours
timing, destination
and mode
Secondary Tours
timing, destination
and mode
30
Highlights of Activity Schedule System
● Key feature
– Integrated schedule
● Key weaknesses
– Larger choice set
• Unrealistic behaviorally
• Computationally burdensome
– Incomplete representation
• Coarse representation of schedule
• Coupling constraints
31
Portland Activity-Based Model
Work-Based Subtour
32
Preliminary Application Results
Source: Bowman, 1998, “The Day Activity Schedule Approach to Travel Demand Analysis,” PhD Thesis, MIT
33
Preliminary Application Results
34
Preliminary Application Results
Source: Bowman, 1998, “The Day Activity Schedule Approach to Travel Demand Analysis,” PhD Thesis, MIT
35
Preliminary Application Results
Source: Bowman, 1998, “The Day Activity Schedule Approach to Travel Demand Analysis,” PhD Thesis, MIT
36
Trends in Transportation Demand Modeling
● DATA:
Massive OD Surveys • Small-Scale Detailed Surveys
● MODELING METHODS:
Aggregate Models • Disaggregate Models
Static • Dynamic
Canned Statistical Procedures • Flexible Estimation of Models
● APPLICATION/FORECASTING:
Mainframe • User-friendly GIS, powerful PC Systems
(microsimulation)
● BEHAVIORAL REPRESENTATION:
Homogeneous • Heterogeneous (including demographics,
37
Emerging Travel Modeling Approaches
38
MIT OpenCourseWare
http://ocw.mit.edu
For information about citing these materials or our Terms of Use, visit: http://ocw.mit.edu/terms.