IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/eejocm/v42y2022ics1755534521000695.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Utilising activity space concepts to sampling of alternatives for mode and destination choice modelling of discretionary activities

Author

Listed:
  • Tsoleridis, Panagiotis
  • Choudhury, Charisma F.
  • Hess, Stephane

Abstract

Choice models estimated on datasets with large numbers of alternatives present significant challenges leading to rapidly expanding computational cost, as well as potential behavioural realism issues. Sampling of alternatives has been a well-established method for overcoming the computational limitations, mostly applied to models of residential location. Nonetheless, destination choice models of discretionary activities require a different type of analysis, since the choice can be governed by time–space constraints and familiarity regarding the alternatives. Observing the general areas of travel for a period of days using high resolution GPS tracking can provide important information of the individuals’ whereabouts. The present study, taking advantage of such a dataset, proposes a more behaviourally realistic sampling protocol to reduce the choice set utilising the geography-based concepts of activity spaces. Differential importance sampling rates are applied depending on the individual’s activity space and trip chain making the resulting sampled choice set a function of person-specific spatial awareness and mode-specific time–space constraints. The performance of the sampling protocol developed is assessed using a model estimated with the full choice set and compared with random sampling and several other importance sampling protocols. The modelling outputs suggest that random sampling should be used with care, since it can result in highly biased estimates, but with low standard errors, as well. The proposed approach incorporates both time–space constraints and individual spatial awareness and is able to produce less biased estimates, achieve higher sampling stability and statistical efficiency, while also avoiding overfitting.

Suggested Citation

  • Tsoleridis, Panagiotis & Choudhury, Charisma F. & Hess, Stephane, 2022. "Utilising activity space concepts to sampling of alternatives for mode and destination choice modelling of discretionary activities," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 42(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:eejocm:v:42:y:2022:i:c:s1755534521000695
    DOI: 10.1016/j.jocm.2021.100336
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1755534521000695
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.jocm.2021.100336?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Zachary Patterson & Steven Farber, 2015. "Potential Path Areas and Activity Spaces in Application: A Review," Transport Reviews, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 35(6), pages 679-700, November.
    2. Cascetta, Ennio & Papola, Andrea, 2009. "Dominance among alternatives in random utility models," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 43(2), pages 170-179, February.
    3. Kay Axhausen & Andrea Zimmermann & Stefan Schönfelder & Guido Rindsfüser & Thomas Haupt, 2002. "Observing the rhythms of daily life: A six-week travel diary," Transportation, Springer, vol. 29(2), pages 95-124, May.
    4. Sanko, Nobuhiro & Hess, Stephane & Dumont, Jeffrey & Daly, Andrew, 2014. "Contrasting imputation with a latent variable approach to dealing with missing income in choice models," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 12(C), pages 47-57.
    5. Kristoffersson, Ida & Daly, Andrew & Algers, Staffan, 2018. "Modelling the attraction of travel to shopping destinations in large-scale modelling," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 52-62.
    6. Jean-Claude Thill & Joel L. Horowitz, 1997. "Modelling Non-Work Destination Choices with Choice Sets Defined by Travel-Time Constraints," Advances in Spatial Science, in: Manfred M. Fischer & Arthur Getis (ed.), Recent Developments in Spatial Analysis, chapter 10, pages 186-208, Springer.
    7. Farooq, Bilal & Miller, Eric J., 2012. "Towards integrated land use and transportation: A dynamic disequilibrium based microsimulation framework for built space markets," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 46(7), pages 1030-1053.
    8. Daly, Andrew & Hess, Stephane & de Jong, Gerard, 2012. "Calculating errors for measures derived from choice modelling estimates," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 46(2), pages 333-341.
    9. Daly, Andrew, 1982. "Estimating choice models containing attraction variables," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 16(1), pages 5-15, February.
    10. Scott, Darren M. & He, Sylvia Y., 2012. "Modeling constrained destination choice for shopping: a GIS-based, time-geographic approach," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 23(C), pages 60-71.
    11. Larsen, K. & Gilliland, J. & Hess, P. & Tucker, P. & Irwin, J. & He, M., 2009. "The influence of the physical environment and sociodemographic characteristics on children's mode of travel to and from school," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 99(3), pages 520-526.
    12. Chiara Calastri & Romain Crastes dit Sourd & Stephane Hess, 2020. "We want it all: experiences from a survey seeking to capture social network structures, lifetime events and short-term travel and activity planning," Transportation, Springer, vol. 47(1), pages 175-201, February.
    13. Swait, Joffre & Ben-Akiva, Moshe, 1987. "Incorporating random constraints in discrete models of choice set generation," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 21(2), pages 91-102, April.
    14. Leite Mariante, Gabriel & Ma, Tai-Yu & Van Acker, Véronique, 2018. "Modeling discretionary activity location choice using detour factors and sampling of alternatives for mixed logit models," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 151-165.
    15. Kitamura, Ryuichi, 1984. "Incorporating trip chaining into analysis of destination choice," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 67-81, February.
    16. Guevara, C. Angelo & Ben-Akiva, Moshe E., 2013. "Sampling of alternatives in Logit Mixture models," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 185-198.
    17. Martínez, Francisco & Aguila, Felipe & Hurtubia, Ricardo, 2009. "The constrained multinomial logit: A semi-compensatory choice model," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 43(3), pages 365-377, March.
    18. Guevara, C. Angelo & Ben-Akiva, Moshe E., 2013. "Sampling of alternatives in Multivariate Extreme Value (MEV) models," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 31-52.
    19. Pasquale A. Pellegrini & A. Stewart Fotheringham & Ge Lin, 1997. "An Empirical Evaluation Of Parameter Sensitivity To Choice Set Definition In Shopping Destination Choice Models," Papers in Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 76(2), pages 257-284, April.
    20. Ye, Xin & Pendyala, Ram M. & Gottardi, Giovanni, 2007. "An exploration of the relationship between mode choice and complexity of trip chaining patterns," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 41(1), pages 96-113, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Tsoleridis, Panagiotis & Choudhury, Charisma F. & Hess, Stephane, 2023. "Probabilistic choice set formation incorporating activity spaces into the context of mode and destination choice modelling," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 108(C).
    2. Bhat, Chandra R., 2015. "A comprehensive dwelling unit choice model accommodating psychological constructs within a search strategy for consideration set formation," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 161-188.
    3. Tsoleridis, Panagiotis & Choudhury, Charisma F. & Hess, Stephane, 2022. "Deriving transport appraisal values from emerging revealed preference data," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 225-245.
    4. Leite Mariante, Gabriel & Ma, Tai-Yu & Van Acker, Véronique, 2018. "Modeling discretionary activity location choice using detour factors and sampling of alternatives for mixed logit models," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 151-165.
    5. Yao, Rui & Bekhor, Shlomo, 2022. "A variational autoencoder approach for choice set generation and implicit perception of alternatives in choice modeling," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 158(C), pages 273-294.
    6. Kang, Sanggyun, 2020. "Warehouse location choice: A case study in Los Angeles, CA," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    7. Scott, Darren M. & He, Sylvia Y., 2012. "Modeling constrained destination choice for shopping: a GIS-based, time-geographic approach," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 23(C), pages 60-71.
    8. Keya, Nowreen & Anowar, Sabreena & Bhowmik, Tanmoy & Eluru, Naveen, 2021. "A joint framework for modeling freight mode and destination choice: Application to the US commodity flow survey data," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 146(C).
    9. Zolfaghari, Alireza & Sivakumar, Aruna & Polak, John, 2013. "Simplified probabilistic choice set formation models in a residential location choice context," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 9(C), pages 3-13.
    10. Kristoffersson, Ida & Daly, Andrew & Algers, Staffan, 2018. "Modelling the attraction of travel to shopping destinations in large-scale modelling," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 52-62.
    11. Kaplan, Sigal & Shiftan, Yoram & Bekhor, Shlomo, 2012. "Development and estimation of a semi-compensatory model with a flexible error structure," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 46(2), pages 291-304.
    12. O'Driscoll, Conor & Crowley, Frank & Doran, Justin & McCarthy, Nóirín, 2022. "Retail sprawl and CO2 emissions: Retail centres in Irish cities," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 102(C).
    13. Crawford, Gregory S. & Griffith, Rachel & Iaria, Alessandro, 2021. "A survey of preference estimation with unobserved choice set heterogeneity," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 222(1), pages 4-43.
    14. Habtamu Tilahun Kassahun & Bo Jellesmark Thorsen & Joffre Swait & Jette Bredahl Jacobsen, 2020. "Social Cooperation in the Context of Integrated Private and Common Land Management," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 75(1), pages 105-136, January.
    15. C. Angelo Guevara, 2022. "A Note on "A survey of preference estimation with unobserved choice set heterogeneity" by Gregory S. Crawford, Rachel Griffith, and Alessandro Iaria," Papers 2205.00852, arXiv.org.
    16. Melstrom, Richard T., 2017. "The petroleum industry's response to an endangered species listing," 2017 Annual Meeting, July 30-August 1, Chicago, Illinois 258281, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    17. Melstrom, Richard T., 2017. "Where to drill? The petroleum industry's response to an endangered species listing," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 320-327.
    18. Schmid, Basil & Becker, Felix & Axhausen, Kay W. & Widmer, Paul & Stein, Petra, 2023. "A simultaneous model of residential location, mobility tool ownership and mode choice using latent variables," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 178(C).
    19. Cascetta, Ennio & Papola, Andrea, 2009. "Dominance among alternatives in random utility models," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 43(2), pages 170-179, February.
    20. Michael Duncan, 2016. "How much can trip chaining reduce VMT? A simplified method," Transportation, Springer, vol. 43(4), pages 643-659, July.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:eejocm:v:42:y:2022:i:c:s1755534521000695. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.journals.elsevier.com/journal-of-choice-modelling .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.