Ning Huan, Stephane Hess, Toshiyuki Yamamoto, Enjian Yao
{"title":"特大城市地区多式联运旅客行为建模:同步估算框架与顺序估算框架的比较","authors":"Ning Huan, Stephane Hess, Toshiyuki Yamamoto, Enjian Yao","doi":"10.1007/s11116-024-10489-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The sustained expansion of mega-city regions and the development of multimodal transport networks have catalysed intercity mobility, thereby restructuring regional travel demand patterns. This study aims to interpret the behaviour of intermodal travellers in a short-haul intercity context within mega-city regions. A comparative modelling framework, utilising both simultaneous and sequential estimation methods, is proposed based on stated preference survey data collected in the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region, China. The simultaneous estimation framework examines the integrated measurement of the perceived utility of multiple stages of travel using cross-nested logit models. In contrast, the sequential estimation framework systematically investigates the bidirectional interactions associated with the intercity mode decision and decisions related to access and egress modes in a stepwise manner. The latter quantifies the accessibility of transport hubs and destinations to assess the implicit cost of feeder trips in the intercity mode decision. It validates the sequential impact on feeder mode choice preferences. In addition to identifying behavioural determinants, the models’ relative performance is assessed regarding behaviour prediction accuracy for diverse groups of travellers categorised by travel purpose, fellow traveller, baggage size, and travel frequency. Statistically, the weighted prediction errors for access, intercity, and egress mode choices are 1.12%, 1.33%, and 0.89% under the simultaneous estimation framework. In contrast, under the sequential estimation framework, these errors are reduced to 0.81%, 0.63%, and 0.50%, respectively. The results suggest the superior applicability of the latter in interpreting intermodal mobility patterns.</p>","PeriodicalId":49419,"journal":{"name":"Transportation","volume":"15 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Modelling intermodal traveller behaviour in mega-city regions: simultaneous versus sequential estimation frameworks\",\"authors\":\"Ning Huan, Stephane Hess, Toshiyuki Yamamoto, Enjian Yao\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s11116-024-10489-2\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>The sustained expansion of mega-city regions and the development of multimodal transport networks have catalysed intercity mobility, thereby restructuring regional travel demand patterns. This study aims to interpret the behaviour of intermodal travellers in a short-haul intercity context within mega-city regions. A comparative modelling framework, utilising both simultaneous and sequential estimation methods, is proposed based on stated preference survey data collected in the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region, China. The simultaneous estimation framework examines the integrated measurement of the perceived utility of multiple stages of travel using cross-nested logit models. In contrast, the sequential estimation framework systematically investigates the bidirectional interactions associated with the intercity mode decision and decisions related to access and egress modes in a stepwise manner. The latter quantifies the accessibility of transport hubs and destinations to assess the implicit cost of feeder trips in the intercity mode decision. It validates the sequential impact on feeder mode choice preferences. In addition to identifying behavioural determinants, the models’ relative performance is assessed regarding behaviour prediction accuracy for diverse groups of travellers categorised by travel purpose, fellow traveller, baggage size, and travel frequency. Statistically, the weighted prediction errors for access, intercity, and egress mode choices are 1.12%, 1.33%, and 0.89% under the simultaneous estimation framework. In contrast, under the sequential estimation framework, these errors are reduced to 0.81%, 0.63%, and 0.50%, respectively. The results suggest the superior applicability of the latter in interpreting intermodal mobility patterns.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49419,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Transportation\",\"volume\":\"15 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Transportation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"5\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11116-024-10489-2\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"工程技术\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ENGINEERING, CIVIL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Transportation","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11116-024-10489-2","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, CIVIL","Score":null,"Total":0}
Modelling intermodal traveller behaviour in mega-city regions: simultaneous versus sequential estimation frameworks
The sustained expansion of mega-city regions and the development of multimodal transport networks have catalysed intercity mobility, thereby restructuring regional travel demand patterns. This study aims to interpret the behaviour of intermodal travellers in a short-haul intercity context within mega-city regions. A comparative modelling framework, utilising both simultaneous and sequential estimation methods, is proposed based on stated preference survey data collected in the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region, China. The simultaneous estimation framework examines the integrated measurement of the perceived utility of multiple stages of travel using cross-nested logit models. In contrast, the sequential estimation framework systematically investigates the bidirectional interactions associated with the intercity mode decision and decisions related to access and egress modes in a stepwise manner. The latter quantifies the accessibility of transport hubs and destinations to assess the implicit cost of feeder trips in the intercity mode decision. It validates the sequential impact on feeder mode choice preferences. In addition to identifying behavioural determinants, the models’ relative performance is assessed regarding behaviour prediction accuracy for diverse groups of travellers categorised by travel purpose, fellow traveller, baggage size, and travel frequency. Statistically, the weighted prediction errors for access, intercity, and egress mode choices are 1.12%, 1.33%, and 0.89% under the simultaneous estimation framework. In contrast, under the sequential estimation framework, these errors are reduced to 0.81%, 0.63%, and 0.50%, respectively. The results suggest the superior applicability of the latter in interpreting intermodal mobility patterns.
期刊介绍:
In our first issue, published in 1972, we explained that this Journal is intended to promote the free and vigorous exchange of ideas and experience among the worldwide community actively concerned with transportation policy, planning and practice. That continues to be our mission, with a clear focus on topics concerned with research and practice in transportation policy and planning, around the world.
These four words, policy and planning, research and practice are our key words. While we have a particular focus on transportation policy analysis and travel behaviour in the context of ground transportation, we willingly consider all good quality papers that are highly relevant to transportation policy, planning and practice with a clear focus on innovation, on extending the international pool of knowledge and understanding. Our interest is not only with transportation policies - and systems and services – but also with their social, economic and environmental impacts, However, papers about the application of established procedures to, or the development of plans or policies for, specific locations are unlikely to prove acceptable unless they report experience which will be of real benefit those working elsewhere. Papers concerned with the engineering, safety and operational management of transportation systems are outside our scope.