Risk-Averse Network Design with Behavioral Conditional Value-at-Risk for Hazardous Materials Transportation

References

• Abkowitz MD, Lepofsky M, Cheng P (1992) Selecting criteria for designating hazardous materials highway routes. Transportation Res. Record 1333:30–35.Google Scholar
• Artzner P, Delbaen F, Eber JM, Heath D (1997) Thinking coherently: generalised scenarios rather than VaR should be used when calculating regulatory capital. Risk 10:68–71.Google Scholar
• Artzner P, Delbaen F, Eber JM, Heath D (1999) Coherent measures of risk. Math. Finance 9(3):203–228.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Battelle (2006) Hazardous materials routing survey analysis. Accessed August 5, 2019, https://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/sites/fmcsa.dot.gov/files/docs/HM-Highway-Routing-Route-Plan-Guidance-Report-and-Appendices-FINAL-March-2009.pdf.Google Scholar
• Ben-Akiva M, Bierlaire M (1999) Discrete choice methods and their applications to short term travel decisions. Hall RW, ed. Handbook of Transportation Science (Springer, Boston), 5–33.Google Scholar
• Ben-Akiva ME, Lerman SR, Lerman SR (1985) Discrete Choice Analysis: Theory and Application to Travel Demand, vol. 9 (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA).Google Scholar
• Ben-Akiva M, Bergman M, Daly AJ, Ramaswamy R (1984) Modeling inter-urban route choice behaviour. Volmuller J, Hamerslag R, eds. Proc. 9th Internat. Sympos. Transportation Traffic Theory (VNU Science Press, Delft, Netherlands), 299–330.Google Scholar
• Birge JR (1982) The value of the stochastic solution in stochastic linear programs with fixed recourse. Math. Programming 24(1):314–325.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bonvicini S, Spadoni G (2008) A hazmat multi-commodity routing model satisfying risk criteria: A case study. J. Loss Prevention Process Industries 21(4):345–358.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cascetta E, Nuzzolo A, Russo F, Vitetta A (1996) A modified logit route choice model overcoming path overlapping problems: specification and some calibration results for interurban networks. Proc. 13th Internat. Sympos. Transportation Traffic Theory (Pergamon, New York), 697–711.Google Scholar
• Daganzo CF, Sheffi Y (1977) On stochastic models of traffic assignment. Transportation Sci. 11(3):253–274.Link, Google Scholar
• Davis GA (1994) Exact local solution of the continuous network design problem via stochastic user equilibrium assignment. Transportation Res. Part B: Methodological 28(1):61–75.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dial RB (1971) A probabilistic multipath traffic assignment model which obviates path enumeration. Transportation Res. 5(2):83–111.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Duffie D, Pan J (1997) An overview of value at risk. J. Derivatives 4(3):7–49.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dunning I, Huchette J, Lubin M (2017) JuMP: A modeling language for mathematical optimization. SIAM Rev. 59(2):295–320.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Erkut E, Gzara F (2008) Solving the hazmat transport network design problem. Comput. Oper. Res. 35(7):2234–2247.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Erkut E, Ingolfsson A (2000) Catastrophe avoidance models for hazardous materials route planning. Transportation Sci. 34(2):165–179.Link, Google Scholar
• Esfandeh T, Batta R, Kwon C (2017) Time-dependent hazardous-materials network design problem. Transportation Sci. 52(2):454–473.Link, Google Scholar
• Esfandeh T, Kwon C, Batta R (2016) Regulating hazardous materials transportation by dual toll pricing. Transportation Res. Part B: Methodological 83(January):20–35.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fan T, Chiang WC, Russell R (2015) Modeling urban hazmat transportation with road closure consideration. Transportation Res. Part D: Transport Environment 35(March):104–115.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (2001) Comparative risks of hazardous materials and nonhazardous materials truck shipment accidents/incidents. Accessed August 5, 2019, https://www.hsdl.org/?abstract&did=233019.Google Scholar
• Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (2016) Federal motor carrier safety regulations. Accessed August 8, 2019, https://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/regulations/hazardous-materials/how-comply-federal-hazardous-materials-regulations.Google Scholar
• Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (2018) National hazardous materials route registry. Accessed August 8, 2019, https://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/regulations/hazardous-materials/national-hazardous-materials-route-registry.Google Scholar
• Fontaine P, Minner S (2018) Benders decomposition for the hazmat transport network design problem. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 267(3):996–1002.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Geoffrion AM (1972) Generalized benders decomposition. J. Optim. Theory Appl. 10(4):237–260.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gzara F (2013) A cutting plane approach for bilevel hazardous material transport network design. Oper. Res. Lett. 41(1):40–46.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hess S, Quddus M, Rieser-Schüssler N, Daly A (2015) Developing advanced route choice models for heavy goods vehicles using GPS data. Transportation Res. Part E: Logist. Transportation Rev. 77:29–44.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hosseini SD, Verma M (2018) Conditional value-at-risk (CVaR) methodology to optimal train configuration and routing of rail hazmat shipments. Transportation Res. Part B: Methodological 110(April):79–103.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jin H, Batta R (1997) Objectives derived form viewing hazmat shipments as a sequence of independent Bernoulli trials. Transportation Sci. 31(3):252–261.Link, Google Scholar
• Kang Y, Batta R, Kwon C (2014) Value-at-risk model for hazardous material transportation. Ann. Oper. Res. 222(1):361–387.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kara BY, Verter V (2004) Designing a road network for hazardous materials transportation. Transportation Sci. 38(2):188–196.Link, Google Scholar
• Kwon C, Lee T, Berglund P (2013) Robust shortest path problems with two uncertain multiplicative cost coefficients. Naval Res. Logist. 60(5):375–394.Crossref, Google Scholar
• List GF, Mirchandani PB, Turnquist MA, Zografos KG (1991) Modeling and analysis for hazardous materials transportation: Risk analysis, routing/scheduling and facility location. Transportation Sci. 25(2):100–114.Link, Google Scholar
• Liu H, Wang DZ (2015) Global optimization method for network design problem with stochastic user equilibrium. Transportation Res. Part B: Methodological 72(February):20–39.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Marcotte P, Mercier A, Savard G, Verter V (2009) Toll policies for mitigating hazardous materials transport risk. Transportation Sci. 43(2):228–243.Link, Google Scholar
• McFadden D (1975) The revealed preferences of a government bureaucracy: Theory. Bell J. Econom. 6(2):401–416.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (2012) Emergency response guidebook: A guidebook for first responders during the initial phase of a dangerous goods/hazardous materials transportation incident. Accessed August 5, 2019, https://www.snchiefs.com/media/ERG2012.pdf.Google Scholar
• Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (2017) Hazmat incident report: 10 year incident summary reports. Accessed August 5, 2019, https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/hazmat-program-management-data-andstatistics/data-operations/incident-statistics.Google Scholar
• Prashker JN, Bekhor S (2004) Route choice models used in the stochastic user equilibrium problem: a review. Transportation Rev. 24(4):437–463.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Quattrone A, Vitetta A (2011) Random and fuzzy utility models for road route choice. Transportation Res. Part E: Logist. Transportation Rev. 47(6):1126–1139.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ramming MS (2001) Network knowledge and route choice. PhD thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge.Google Scholar
• Rockafellar RT, Uryasev S (2000) Optimization of conditional value-at-risk. J. Risk 2(2):21–42.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rockafellar RT, Uryasev S (2002) Conditional value-at-risk for general loss distributions. J. Banking Finance 26(7):1443–1471.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Santoso T, Ahmed S, Goetschalckx M, Shapiro A (2005) A stochastic programming approach for supply chain network design under uncertainty. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 167(1):96–115.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Su L, Sun L, Karwan M, Kwon C (2019) Spectral risk measure minimization in hazardous materials transportation. IISE Trans. 51(6):638–652.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sun L, Karwan MH, Kwon C (2016) Robust hazmat network design problems considering risk uncertainty. Transportation Sci. 50(4):1188–1203.Link, Google Scholar
• Sun L, Karwan MH, Kwon C (2018) Generalized bounded rationality and robust multi-commodity network design. Oper. Res. 66(1):42–57.Link, Google Scholar
• Taslimi M, Batta R, Kwon C (2017) A comprehensive modeling framework for hazmat network design, hazmat response team location, and equity of risk. Comput. Oper. Res. 79(March):119–130.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Toumazis I, Kwon C (2013) Routing hazardous materials on time-dependent networks using conditional value-at-risk. Transportation Res. Part C: Emerging Tech. 37(December):73–92.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Toumazis I, Kwon C (2016) Worst-case conditional value-at-risk minimization for hazardous materials transportation. Transportation Sci. 50(4):1174–1187.Link, Google Scholar
• Toumazis I, Kwon C, Batta R (2013) Value-at-risk and conditional value-at-risk minimization for hazardous materials routing. Handbook of OR/MS Models in Hazardous Materials Transportation, vol. 37 (Springer, New York), 127–154.Google Scholar
• Verter V, Kara BY (2008) A path-based approach for hazmat transport network design. Management Sci. 54(1):29–40.Link, Google Scholar
• Williams HC (1977) On the formation of travel demand models and economic evaluation measures of user benefit. Environment Planning A: Econom. Space 9(3):285–344.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Yen JY (1971) Finding the K shortest loopless paths in a network. Management Sci. 17(11):712–716.Link, Google Scholar