IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/transa/v179y2024ics0965856423002896.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Pivoting from a known base when predicting choices using logit models

Author

Listed:
  • Bates, John J.

Abstract

Logit models are widely used by transport practitioners for forecasting. It is important that such models make appropriate use of existing independent base data, a process often referred to as “pivoting” and recommended by the UK Department for Transport’s Transport Appraisal Guidance. In the transport context, such base data typically relates to mode and destination shares. The general aim of pivoting is to produce a forecast under changed circumstances while maintaining compatibility with a reliable base position. Various methods for pivoting are available, and the paper investigates three of them in the context of different logit models (MNL, NL and CNL), illustrating them using a simple example of mode and destination choice. For the simplest MNL model, the three methods are essentially equivalent, but they start to diverge as the models become more complex. Although it will not always be the most convenient approach, depending on the software implementation, the “residual disutility” method would seem to be able to deal satisfactorily with all the cases investigated. It is recommended that software be developed to deal with some of the currently less tractable cases.

Suggested Citation

  • Bates, John J., 2024. "Pivoting from a known base when predicting choices using logit models," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 179(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:transa:v:179:y:2024:i:c:s0965856423002896
    DOI: 10.1016/j.tra.2023.103869
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0965856423002896
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.tra.2023.103869?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. Michel Bierlaire, 2006. "A theoretical analysis of the cross-nested logit model," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 144(1), pages 287-300, April.
    2. Stephane Hess & Mark Fowler & Thomas Adler & Aniss Bahreinian, 2012. "A joint model for vehicle type and fuel type choice: evidence from a cross-nested logit study," Transportation, Springer, vol. 39(3), pages 593-625, May.
    3. Deaton,Angus & Muellbauer,John, 1980. "Economics and Consumer Behavior," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521296762, September.
    4. Train,Kenneth E., 2009. "Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521766555.
    5. Verboven, Frank, 1996. "The nested logit model and representative consumer theory," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 50(1), pages 57-63, January.
    6. Wen, Chieh-Hua & Koppelman, Frank S., 2001. "The generalized nested logit model," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 35(7), pages 627-641, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Sun, Lingling & Li, Haibin & Jia, Qingquan & Zhang, Gong, 2024. "Optimization method of dynamic reconfiguration in virtual power plants," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 228(C).

    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. Peter Davis & Pasquale Schiraldi, 2014. "The flexible coefficient multinomial logit (FC-MNL) model of demand for differentiated products," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 45(1), pages 32-63, March.
    2. Laura Grigolon, 2021. "Blurred boundaries: A flexible approach for segmentation applied to the car market," Quantitative Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 12(4), pages 1273-1305, November.
    3. Tinessa, Fiore & Marzano, Vittorio & Papola, Andrea, 2020. "Mixing distributions of tastes with a Combination of Nested Logit (CoNL) kernel: Formulation and performance analysis," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 1-23.
    4. Breitmoser, Yves, 2010. "Hierarchical Reasoning versus Iterated Reasoning in p-Beauty Contest Guessing Games," MPRA Paper 19893, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. Hongmin Li & Scott Webster, 2017. "Optimal Pricing of Correlated Product Options Under the Paired Combinatorial Logit Model," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 65(5), pages 1215-1230, October.
    6. Drabas, Tomasz & Wu, Cheng-Lung, 2013. "Modelling air carrier choices with a Segment Specific Cross Nested Logit model," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 32(C), pages 8-16.
    7. Tinessa, Fiore, 2021. "Closed-form random utility models with mixture distributions of random utilities: Exploring finite mixtures of qGEV models," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 262-288.
    8. Chikaraishi, Makoto & Nakayama, Shoichiro, 2016. "Discrete choice models with q-product random utilities," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 93(PA), pages 576-595.
    9. Faza Fawzan Bastarianto & Muhammad Zudhy Irawan & Charisma Choudhury & David Palma & Imam Muthohar, 2019. "A Tour-Based Mode Choice Model for Commuters in Indonesia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-20, February.
    10. Bekhor, Shlomo & Prashker, Joseph N., 2008. "GEV-based destination choice models that account for unobserved similarities among alternatives," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 42(3), pages 243-262, March.
    11. Flügel, Stefan & Halse, Askill H. & Ortúzar, Juan de Dios & Rizzi, Luis I., 2015. "Methodological challenges in modelling the choice of mode for a new travel alternative using binary stated choice data – The case of high speed rail in Norway," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 438-451.
    12. Zhang, Le & Duan, Peng & Jiang, Hai, 2024. "Modeling joint row- and column-wise correlation in air passenger seat selection: A cross-nested logit approach," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 114(C).
    13. Stephane Hess & Mark Fowler & Thomas Adler & Aniss Bahreinian, 2012. "A joint model for vehicle type and fuel type choice: evidence from a cross-nested logit study," Transportation, Springer, vol. 39(3), pages 593-625, May.
    14. Ibeas, Ángel & Cordera, Ruben & dell’Olio, Luigi & Coppola, Pierluigi, 2013. "Modelling the spatial interactions between workplace and residential location," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 110-122.
    15. Anna Fernández-Antolín & Matthieu Lapparent & Michel Bierlaire, 2018. "Modeling purchases of new cars: an analysis of the 2014 French market," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 84(2), pages 277-303, March.
    16. Wen, Chieh-Hua & Huang, Chia-Jung & Fu, Chiang, 2020. "Incorporating continuous representation of preferences for flight departure times into stated itinerary choice modeling," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 10-20.
    17. Paleti, Rajesh, 2018. "Generalized multinomial probit Model: Accommodating constrained random parameters," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 248-262.
    18. Konrad Menzel, 2021. "Structural Sieves," Papers 2112.01377, arXiv.org, revised Apr 2022.
    19. Bertoli, Simone & Fernández-Huertas Moraga, Jesús, 2013. "Multilateral resistance to migration," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 79-100.
    20. Jeremy Lise & Shannon Seitz, 2011. "Consumption Inequality and Intra-household Allocations," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 78(1), pages 328-355.

    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:transa:v:179:y:2024:i:c:s0965856423002896. 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.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/547/description#description .

    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.