IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/transp/v44y2017i3d10.1007_s11116-015-9671-5.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Activity sequencing, location, and formation of individual non-mandatory tours: application to the activity-based models for Columbus, Cincinnati, and Cleveland, OH

Author

Listed:
  • Rajesh Paleti

    (Old Dominion University)

  • Peter Vovsha

    (Parsons Brinckerhoff)

  • Gaurav Vyas

    (Parsons Brinckerhoff)

  • Rebekah Anderson

    (Ohio Department of Transportation)

  • Gregory Giaimo

    (Ohio Department of Transportation)

Abstract

Most of the earlier activity based models (ABMs) largely relied on a tour-based modeling paradigm which explicitly predicts tour frequency and then adds details including stop frequency, order, and location of stops within each tour. The current study is part of new tour formation design framework for an ABM in which the underlying tour structure and the stop frequency within tours emerge from temporal, sequencing, and locational preferences of activities that the traveler intends to participate during the day. In order to do this, the study developed a modified rank-ordered logit (ROL) framework that is capable of modeling sequence, locations, as well as the underlying tour structure of all activity episodes simultaneously in an integrated manner. Model estimation with the household survey data, provided several important behavioral insights into underlying choices that drive tour formation. Specifically, the study uncovered pairwise ordering preferences among episodes of different activity purposes, clustering tendencies among episodes of same activity purpose, the impact of supply side activity opportunities on the location and sequence choice dimensions, and impedance effects (including distance and mode and time-of-day logsums) on location and tour break dimensions. The developed models are incorporated in the operational ABM structure adopted for three major cities (Columbus, Cleveland, and Cincinnati) in Ohio.

Suggested Citation

  • Rajesh Paleti & Peter Vovsha & Gaurav Vyas & Rebekah Anderson & Gregory Giaimo, 2017. "Activity sequencing, location, and formation of individual non-mandatory tours: application to the activity-based models for Columbus, Cincinnati, and Cleveland, OH," Transportation, Springer, vol. 44(3), pages 615-640, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:transp:v:44:y:2017:i:3:d:10.1007_s11116-015-9671-5
    DOI: 10.1007/s11116-015-9671-5
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11116-015-9671-5
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11116-015-9671-5?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. Dennis Fok & Richard Paap & Bram Van Dijk, 2012. "A Rank‐Ordered Logit Model With Unobserved Heterogeneity In Ranking Capabilities," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 27(5), pages 831-846, August.
    2. Chandra Bhat & Konstadinos Goulias & Ram Pendyala & Rajesh Paleti & Raghuprasad Sidharthan & Laura Schmitt & Hsi-Hwa Hu, 2013. "A household-level activity pattern generation model with an application for Southern California," Transportation, Springer, vol. 40(5), pages 1063-1086, September.
    3. Paleti, Rajesh & Bhat, Chandra R., 2013. "The composite marginal likelihood (CML) estimation of panel ordered-response models," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 7(C), pages 24-43.
    4. 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.
    5. Beggs, S. & Cardell, S. & Hausman, J., 1981. "Assessing the potential demand for electric cars," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 17(1), pages 1-19, September.
    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. Ge Gao & Huijun Sun & Jianjun Wu, 2019. "Activity-based trip chaining behavior analysis in the network under the parking fee scheme," Transportation, Springer, vol. 46(3), pages 647-669, June.
    2. Leila Dianat & Khandker Nurul Habib & Eric J. Miller, 2020. "Investigating the influence of assigning a higher priority to scheduling work and school activities in the activity-based models on the simulated travel/activity patterns," Transportation, Springer, vol. 47(5), pages 2109-2132, October.
    3. Gaurav Vyas & Pooneh Famili & Peter Vovsha & Daniel Fay & Ashish Kulshrestha & Greg Giaimo & Rebekah Anderson, 2019. "Incorporating features of autonomous vehicles in activity-based travel demand model for Columbus, OH," Transportation, Springer, vol. 46(6), pages 2081-2102, December.
    4. Usman Ahmed & Ana Tsui Moreno & Rolf Moeckel, 2021. "Microscopic activity sequence generation: a multiple correspondence analysis to explain travel behavior based on socio-demographic person attributes," Transportation, Springer, vol. 48(3), pages 1481-1502, June.
    5. Dianat, Leila & Habib, Khandker Nurul & Miller, Eric J., 2020. "Modeling and forecasting daily non-work/school activity patterns in an activity-based model using skeleton schedule constraints," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 133(C), pages 337-352.
    6. Usman Ahmed & Ana Tsui Moreno & Rolf Moeckel, 0. "Microscopic activity sequence generation: a multiple correspondence analysis to explain travel behavior based on socio-demographic person attributes," Transportation, Springer, vol. 0, pages 1-22.

    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. Gopindra Sivakumar Nair & Sebastian Astroza & Chandra R. Bhat & Sara Khoeini & Ram M. Pendyala, 2018. "An application of a rank ordered probit modeling approach to understanding level of interest in autonomous vehicles," Transportation, Springer, vol. 45(6), pages 1623-1637, November.
    2. Anoek Castelein & Dennis Fok & Richard Paap, 2020. "A multinomial and rank-ordered logit model with inter- and intra-individual heteroscedasticity," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 20-069/III, Tinbergen Institute.
    3. Delle Site, Paolo & Kilani, Karim & Gatta, Valerio & Marcucci, Edoardo & de Palma, André, 2019. "Estimation of consistent Logit and Probit models using best, worst and best–worst choices," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 87-106.
    4. Dumortier, Jerome & Siddiki, Saba & Carley, Sanya & Cisney, Joshua & Krause, Rachel & Lane, Bradley & Rupp, John & Graham, John, 2015. "Effects of Life Cycle Cost Information Disclosure on the Purchase Decision of Hybrid and Plug-In Vehicles," IU SPEA AgEcon Papers 198643, Indiana University, IU School of Public and Environmental Affairs.
    5. Bauer, Dana & Liu, Pengfei & Swallow, Stephen K. & Johnston, Robert J., 2013. "Do Exurban Communities Want More Development?," Working Papers 25, University of Connecticut, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Charles J. Zwick Center for Food and Resource Policy.
    6. Dumortier, Jerome & Siddiki, Saba & Carley, Sanya & Cisney, Joshua & Krause, Rachel M. & Lane, Bradley W. & Rupp, John A. & Graham, John D., 2015. "Effects of providing total cost of ownership information on consumers’ intent to purchase a hybrid or plug-in electric vehicle," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 71-86.
    7. Yan, Jin & Yoo, Hong Il, 2019. "Semiparametric estimation of the random utility model with rank-ordered choice data," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 211(2), pages 414-438.
    8. Arie Beresteanu, 2016. "Efficeincy Gains in Rank-ordered Multinomial Logit Models," Working Paper 5878, Department of Economics, University of Pittsburgh.
    9. Touza, Julia & Pérez-Alonso, Alicia & Chas-Amil, María L. & Dehnen-Schmutz, Katharina, 2014. "Explaining the rank order of invasive plants by stakeholder groups," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 330-341.
    10. Bairagi, Subir K. & Mohanty, Samarendu & Ynion, Jhoanne & Demont, Matty, 2017. "Determinants of Consumer Preferences for Rice Attributes: Evidence from South and Southeast Asia," 2017 Annual Meeting, July 30-August 1, Chicago, Illinois 258384, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    11. José L. Oviedo & Hong Il Yoo, 2017. "A Latent Class Nested Logit Model for Rank-Ordered Data with Application to Cork Oak Reforestation," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 68(4), pages 1021-1051, December.
    12. Changbiao Liu & Yuling Li, 2023. "Estimation of Rank-Ordered Regret Minimization Models," Computational Economics, Springer;Society for Computational Economics, vol. 62(4), pages 1611-1630, December.
    13. Yoo, Hong Il & Doiron, Denise, 2013. "The use of alternative preference elicitation methods in complex discrete choice experiments," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(6), pages 1166-1179.
    14. Kassu Wamisho Hossiso & Aaron Laporte & David Ripplinger, 2017. "The Effects of Contract Mechanism Design and Risk Preferences on Biomass Supply for Ethanol Production," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 33(3), pages 339-357, June.
    15. Ben Aoki-Sherwood & Catherine Bregou & David Liben-Nowell & Kiran Tomlinson & Thomas Zeng, 2024. "Bounding Consideration Probabilities in Consider-Then-Choose Ranking Models," Papers 2401.11016, arXiv.org.
    16. Paolo Delle Site & Karim Kilani & Valerio Gatta & Edoardo Marcucci & André de Palma, 2018. "Estimation of Logit and Probit models using best, worst and best-worst choices," Working Papers hal-01953581, HAL.
    17. Wamisho, Kassu & De Laporte, Aaron & Ripplinger, David, 2015. "Biomass Contracts for Ethanol Production: The Role of Farmer’s Risk Preferences," 2015 AAEA & WAEA Joint Annual Meeting, July 26-28, San Francisco, California 205703, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    18. Marco A. Palma, 2017. "Improving the prediction of ranking data," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 53(4), pages 1681-1710, December.
    19. YingHua He & Thierry Magnac, 2022. "Application Costs and Congestion in Matching Markets," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 132(648), pages 2918-2950.
    20. Kumar, Sushil & Kant, Shashi, 2007. "Exploded logit modeling of stakeholders' preferences for multiple forest values," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 9(5), pages 516-526, January.

    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:kap:transp:v:44:y:2017:i:3:d:10.1007_s11116-015-9671-5. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.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.