Competitive Facility Location with Selfish Users and Queues

References

• Abouee-Mehrizi H, Babri S, Berman O, Shavandi H (2011) Optimizing capacity, pricing and location decisions on a congested network with balking. Math. Methods Oper. Res. 74(2):233–255.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Benati S, Hansen P (2002) The maximum capture problem with random utilities: Problem formulation and algorithms. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 143(3):518–530.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Beresnev V (2013) Branch-and-bound algorithm for a competitive facility location problem. Comput. Oper. Res. 40(8):2062–2070.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Berman O, Drezner Z (2006) Location of congested capacitated facilities with distance-sensitive demand. IIE Trans. 38(3):213–221.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Berman O, Krass D (2015) Stochastic location models with congestion. Laporte G, Nickel S, Saldanha de Gama F, eds. Location Science (Springer, New York), 443–486.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Boffey B, Galvão R, Espejo L (2007) A review of congestion models in the location of facilities with immobile servers. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 178(3):643–662.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Castillo I, Ingolfsson A, Sim T (2009) Socially optimal location of facilities with fixed servers, stochastic demand and congestion. Production Oper. Management 18(6):721–736.Crossref, Google Scholar
• D’Ambrosio C, Lodi A, Martello S (2010) Piecewise linear approximation of functions of two variables in MILP models. Oper. Res. Lett. 38(1):39–46.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Desrochers M, Marcotte P, Stan M (1995) The congested facility location problem. Location Sci. 3(1):9–23.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Drezner T, Drezner Z, Kalczynski P (2015) A leader-follower model for discrete competitive facility location. Comput. Oper. Res. 64:51–59.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fisk C (1980) Some developments in equilibrium traffic assignment methodology. Transportation Res. B 14(3):243–256.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gilbert F, Marcotte P, Savard G (2015) A numerical study of the logit network pricing problem. Transportation Sci. 49(3):706–719.Link, Google Scholar
• Haase K (2009) Discrete location planning. Technical report, Institute of Transport and Logistics Studies, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.Google Scholar
• Haase K, Müller S (2014) A comparison of linear reformulations for multinomial logit choice probabilities in facility location models. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 232(3):689–691.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hakimi S (1983) On locating new facilities in a competitive environment. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 12(1):29–35.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hotelling H (1929) Stability in competition. Econom. J. 39(153):41–57.Google Scholar
• Kim S (2013) Heuristics for congested facility location problem with clearing functions. J. Oper. Res. Soc. 64(12):1780–1789.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Küçükaydin H, Aras N, Altınel IK (2011) Competitive facility location problem with attractiveness adjustment of the follower: A bilevel programming model and its solution. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 208(3):206–220.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Labbé M, Hakimi SL (1991) Market and locational equilibrium for two competitors. Oper. Res. 39(5):749–756.Link, Google Scholar
• Marcotte P (1986) Network design problem with congestion effects: A case of bilevel programming. Math. Programming 34(2):142–162.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Marcotte P, Savard G, Schoeb A (2013) A hybrid approach to the solution of a pricing model with continuous demand segmentation. EURO J. Comput. Optim. 1(1):117–142.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Marianov V (2003) Location of multiple-server congestible facilities for maximizing expected demand, when services are non-essential. Ann. Oper. Res. 123(1–4):125–141.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Marianov V, Serra D (2001) Hierarchical location-allocation models for congested systems. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 135(1):195–208.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Marianov V, Ríos M, Icaza MJ (2008) Facility location for market capture when users rank facilities by shorter travel and waiting times. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 191(1):32–44.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Marić M, Stanimirović Z, Milenković N (2012) Metaheuristic methods for solving the bilevel uncapacitated facility location problem with clients’ preferences. Electronic Notes Discrete Math. 39(0):43–50.Crossref, Google Scholar
• McFadden D (1974) Conditional logit analysis of qualitative choice behavior. Zarembka P, ed. Frontiers in Economics (Wiley, New York), 105–142.Google Scholar
• Rahmati SHA, Ahmadi A, Sharifi M, Chambari A (2014) A multi-objective model for facility location-allocation problem with immobile servers within queuing framework. Comput. Indust. Engrg. 74(0):1–10.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Statistics Canada (2016) Dissemination area boundary file, 2016 census. Statistics Canada Catalogue no. 92-169-X. Accessed June 15, 2017, https://www12.statcan.gc.ca/census-recensement/2011/geo/bound-limit/bound-limit-eng.cfmGoogle Scholar
• Statistics Canada (2017) Health fact sheets. Statistics Canada Online Catalogue no. 82-625-X. Accessed June 15, 2017, http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/82-625-x/2015001/article/14177-eng.htm.Google Scholar
• Vidyarthi N, Jayaswal S (2014) Efficient solution of a class of location-allocation problems with stochastic demand and congestion. Comput. Oper. Res. 48(0):20–30.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Zhang Y, Berman O, Verter V (2012) The impact of client choice on preventive healthcare facility network design. OR Spectrum 34(2):349–370.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Zhang Y, Berman O, Marcotte P, Verter V (2010) A bilevel model for preventive healthcare facility network design with congestion. IIE Trans. 42(12):865–880.Crossref, Google Scholar