IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2023i10p7744-d1142437.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Investigation of Passengers’ Perceived Transfer Distance in Urban Rail Transit Stations Using XGBoost and SHAP

Author

Listed:
  • Chengyuan Mao

    (Road and Traffic Engineering Institute, Zhejiang Normal University, Jinhua 321004, China)

  • Wenjiao Xu

    (Road and Traffic Engineering Institute, Zhejiang Normal University, Jinhua 321004, China)

  • Yiwen Huang

    (Road and Traffic Engineering Institute, Zhejiang Normal University, Jinhua 321004, China)

  • Xintong Zhang

    (Road and Traffic Engineering Institute, Zhejiang Normal University, Jinhua 321004, China)

  • Nan Zheng

    (Road and Traffic Engineering Institute, Zhejiang Normal University, Jinhua 321004, China)

  • Xinhuan Zhang

    (Road and Traffic Engineering Institute, Zhejiang Normal University, Jinhua 321004, China)

Abstract

Providing high-quality public transport services and enhancing passenger experiences require efficient urban rail transit connectivity; however, passengers’ perceived transfer distance at urban rail transit stations may differ from the actual transfer distance, resulting in inconvenience and dissatisfaction. To address this issue, this study proposed a novel machine learning framework that measured the perceived transfer distance in urban rail transit stations and analyzed the significance of each influencing factor. The framework introduced the Ratio of Perceived Transfer Distance Deviation ( R ), which was evaluated using advanced XGBoost and SHAP models. To accurately evaluate R , the proposed framework considered 32 indexes related to passenger personal attributes, transfer facilities, and transfer environment. The study results indicated that the framework based on XGBoost and SHAP models can effectively measure the R of urban rail transit passengers. Key factors that affected R included the Rationality of Signs and Markings, Ratio of Escalators Length, Rationality of Traffic Organization outside The Station, Ratio of Stairs Length, and Degree of Congestion on Passageways. These findings can provide valuable theoretical references for designing transfer facilities and improving transfer service levels in urban rail transit stations.

Suggested Citation

  • Chengyuan Mao & Wenjiao Xu & Yiwen Huang & Xintong Zhang & Nan Zheng & Xinhuan Zhang, 2023. "Investigation of Passengers’ Perceived Transfer Distance in Urban Rail Transit Stations Using XGBoost and SHAP," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(10), pages 1-22, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:10:p:7744-:d:1142437
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/10/7744/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/10/7744/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Daniel Hess, 2012. "Walking to the bus: perceived versus actual walking distance to bus stops for older adults," Transportation, Springer, vol. 39(2), pages 247-266, March.
    2. Katherine L. Baldock & Catherine Paquet & Natasha J. Howard & Neil T. Coffee & Anne W. Taylor & Mark Daniel, 2019. "Correlates of Discordance between Perceived and Objective Distances to Local Fruit and Vegetable Retailers," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(7), pages 1-11, April.
    3. Chen, Enhui & Stathopoulos, Amanda & Nie, Yu (Marco), 2022. "Transfer station choice in a multimodal transit system: An empirical study," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 337-355.
    4. Zohreh Asadi-Shekari & Ismaïl Saadi & Mario Cools, 2022. "Applying Machine Learning to Explore Feelings about Sharing the Road with Autonomous Vehicles as a Bicyclist or as a Pedestrian," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(3), pages 1-10, February.
    5. Guo, Zhan & Wilson, Nigel H.M., 2011. "Assessing the cost of transfer inconvenience in public transport systems: A case study of the London Underground," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 45(2), pages 91-104, February.
    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. Xiaona Zhang & Fu Wang & Weidi Xu & Yin Wang & Jingwen Luo & Xinyu Chen & Manqing Ye, 2023. "Research on the Evaluation of Rail Transit Transfer System Based on the Time Value," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(1), pages 1-25, December.
    2. Hyeon-Seok Kim & Hui-Sang Kim & Sun-Yong Choi, 2024. "Investigating the Impact of Agricultural, Financial, Economic, and Political Factors on Oil Forward Prices and Volatility: A SHAP Analysis," Energies, MDPI, vol. 17(5), pages 1-24, February.

    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. Lois, David & Monzón, Andrés & Hernández, Sara, 2018. "Analysis of satisfaction factors at urban transport interchanges: Measuring travellers’ attitudes to information, security and waiting," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 49-56.
    2. Luyu Liu & Harvey J Miller, 2021. "Measuring risk of missing transfers in public transit systems using high-resolution schedule and real-time bus location data," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 58(15), pages 3140-3156, November.
    3. van Wee, Bert & Bohte, Wendy & Molin, Eric & Arentze, Theo & Liao, Feixiong, 2014. "Policies for synchronization in the transport–land-use system," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(C), pages 1-9.
    4. Allard, Ryan F. & Moura, Filipe, 2018. "Effect of transport transfer quality on intercity passenger mode choice," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 89-107.
    5. Cao, Zhejing & Zhang, Xiaohu & Chua, Kelman & Yu, Honghai & Zhao, Jinhua, 2021. "E-scooter sharing to serve short-distance transit trips: A Singapore case," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 177-196.
    6. Wasserman, Jacob L. & Taylor, Brian D., 2023. "State of the BART: Analyzing the Determinants of Bay Area Rapid Transit Use in the 2010s," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 172(C).
    7. Paul Czioska & Ronny Kutadinata & Aleksandar Trifunović & Stephan Winter & Monika Sester & Bernhard Friedrich, 2019. "Real-world meeting points for shared demand-responsive transportation systems," Public Transport, Springer, vol. 11(2), pages 341-377, August.
    8. Martin Zajac & Jiří Horák & Joaquín Osorio-Arjona & Pavel Kukuliač & James Haworth, 2022. "Public Transport Tweets in London, Madrid and Prague in the COVID-19 Period—Temporal and Spatial Differences in Activity Topics," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(24), pages 1-25, December.
    9. Canca, David & Barrena, Eva & De-Los-Santos, Alicia & Andrade-Pineda, José Luis, 2016. "Setting lines frequency and capacity in dense railway rapid transit networks with simultaneous passenger assignment," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 93(PA), pages 251-267.
    10. Xu, Xin-yue & Liu, Jun & Li, Hai-ying & Jiang, Man, 2016. "Capacity-oriented passenger flow control under uncertain demand: Algorithm development and real-world case study," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 130-148.
    11. Ceder, Avishai & Chowdhury, Subeh & Taghipouran, Nima & Olsen, Jared, 2013. "Modelling public-transport users’ behaviour at connection point," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 27(C), pages 112-122.
    12. Basheer, Muhammad Aamir & van der Waerden, Peter & Kochan, Bruno & Bellemans, Tom & Raheel Shah, Syyed Adnan, 2019. "Multi-stage trips: An exploration of factors affecting mode combination choice of travelers in England," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 95-105.
    13. Nassir, Neema & Hickman, Mark & Malekzadeh, Ali & Irannezhad, Elnaz, 2016. "A utility-based travel impedance measure for public transit network accessibility," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 26-39.
    14. De Zhao & Wei Wang & Amber Woodburn & Megan S. Ryerson, 2017. "Isolating high-priority metro and feeder bus transfers using smart card data," Transportation, Springer, vol. 44(6), pages 1535-1554, November.
    15. Guo, Zhan & Loo, Becky P.Y., 2013. "Pedestrian environment and route choice: evidence from New York City and Hong Kong," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 28(C), pages 124-136.
    16. Jinbao Zhao & Wei Deng & Yan Song & Yueran Zhu, 2014. "Analysis of Metro ridership at station level and station-to-station level in Nanjing: an approach based on direct demand models," Transportation, Springer, vol. 41(1), pages 133-155, January.
    17. Cheng, Yung-Hsiang & Chen, Ssu-Yun, 2015. "Perceived accessibility, mobility, and connectivity of public transportation systems," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 386-403.
    18. Nassir, Neema & Hickman, Mark & Ma, Zhen-Liang, 2019. "A strategy-based recursive path choice model for public transit smart card data," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 528-548.
    19. Saiyad, Gulnazbanu & Srivastava, Minal & Rathwa, Dipak, 2022. "Exploring determinants of feeder mode choice behavior using Artificial Neural Network: Evidences from Delhi metro," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 598(C).
    20. Lee, Misuk & Choi, Hyunhong & Koo, Yoonmo, 2017. "Inconvenience cost of waste disposal behavior in South Korea," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 58-65.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:10:p:7744-:d:1142437. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.