Abstract
Discrete choice models have been used over the years in disaggregated approaches to forecast destination choices. However, there are important constraints in some of these models that pose obstacles to using them, such as the Independence of Irrelevant Alternatives (IIA) property in the Multinomial Logit model, the need to assume specific structures and high calibration times, depending on the complexity of the case being evaluated. However, some of these mentioned constraints could be mitigated using Mixed Models or Nested Logit. Therefore, this paper proposes a comparative analysis between the Artificial Neural Network (ANNs), the Multinomial and Nested Logit models for disaggregated forecasting of urban trip distribution. A case study was conducted in a medium-sized Brazilian city, Santa Maria (RS), Brazil. The data used come from a household survey, prepared for the Urban Mobility Master Plan. For the sake of comparison, hit rates and frequency of trip distribution distances were analyzed, showing that ANNs can be as efficient as the Discrete Choice models for disaggregated forecasting of urban trip destination without, however, assuming some constraints. Finally, based on the results obtained, the efficiency of ANNs is observed for predicting alternatives with a low number of observations. They are important tools for obtaining Origin-Destination matrices from incomplete sample matrices or with a low number of observations. However, it is important to mention that discrete choice models can provide important information for the analyst, such as statistical significance of parameters, elasticities, subjective value of attributes, etc.
Publisher
Programa de Pos Graduacao em Arquitetura e Urbanismo
Reference44 articles.
1. Ben-Akiva, M., D. Bolduc, J. Walker (2003) Specification, Identification, and Estimation of the Logit Kernel (Or Continuous Mixed Logit) Model. Working Paper, 5th Invitational Choice Symposium, Asilomar, California.
2. Ben-Akiva, M.; Lerman, S. R. (1985) Discrete Choice Analysis: Theory and Application to Travel Demand, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
3. Bishop, Christopher M. (1995) Neural networks for pattern recognition. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
4. Black, W. R. (1995) Spatial interaction modeling using artificial neural networks. Journal of Transport Geography, v. 3, n. 3, p. 159–166. DOI: 10.1016/0966-6923(95)00013-S.
5. Caldas, M. U. C.; Pitombo, C. S.; Assirati, L. (2021) Strategy to reduce the number of parameters to be estimated in discrete choice models: an approach to large choice sets. Travel Behaviour and Society, v. 25, p. 1-17. DOI: 10.1016/j.tbs.2021.05.001.