Perturbed Utility Stochastic Traffic Assignment

Published Online:https://doi.org/10.1287/trsc.2023.0449

References

  • Akamatsu T (1996) Cyclic flows, Markov process and stochastic traffic assignment. Transportation Res. Part B Methodological 30(5):369–386.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Akamatsu T (1997) Decomposition of path choice entropy in general transport networks. Transportation Sci. 31(4):349–362.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Allen R, Rehbeck J (2019) Identification with additively separable heterogeneity. Econometrica 87(3):1021–1054.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Attouch H, Peypouquet J (2016) The rate of convergence of Nesterov’s accelerated forward-backward method is actually faster than 1/k^2. SIAM J. Optim. 26(3):1824–1834.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Bar-Gera H (2002) Origin-based algorithm for the traffic assignment problem. Transportation Sci. 36(4):398–417.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Bar-Gera H (2016) Transportation networks for research. Accessed December 1, 2023, https://github.com/bstabler/TransportationNetworks.Google Scholar
  • Beck A, Teboulle M (2009) A fast iterative shrinkage-thresholding algorithm for linear inverse problems. SIAM J. Imaging Sci. 2(1):183–202.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Beckmann M, McGuire CB, Winsten CB (1956) Studies in the economics of transportation. Technical report, Cowles Commission for Research in Economics, Yale University, New Haven, CT.Google Scholar
  • Bekhor S, Prashker JN (1999) Formulations of extended logit stochastic user equilibrium assignments. Proc. 14th Internat. Sympos. Transportation Traffic Theory (Jerusalem, Israel), 351–373.Google Scholar
  • Bekhor S, Prashker J (2001) Stochastic user equilibrium formulation for generalized nested logit model. Transportation Res. Rec. 1752(1):84–90.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Bekhor S, Toledo T (2005) Investigating path-based solution algorithms to the stochastic user equilibrium problem. Transportation Res. Part B Methodological 39(3):279–295.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Bekhor S, Toledo T, Reznikova L (2009) A path-based algorithm for the cross-nested logit stochastic user equilibrium traffic assignment. Comput. Aided Civil Infrastructure Engrg. 24(1):15–25.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Ben-Akiva M, Mcfadden D, Gärling T, Gopinath D, Walker J, Bolduc D, Boersch-Supan A, et al. (1999) Extended framework for modelling choice behavior. Marketing Lett. 10(3):187–203.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Boyd S, Boyd SP, Vandenberghe L (2004) Convex Optimization (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK).CrossrefGoogle 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. Theory Road Traffic Flow (Lyon, France), 697–711.Google Scholar
  • Chambolle A, Dossal C (2015) On the convergence of the iterates of the “fast iterative shrinkage/thresholding algorithm”. J. Optim. Theory Appl. 166:968–982.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Chen A, Jayakrishnan R (1998) A path-based gradient projection algorithm: Effects of equilibration with a restricted path set under two flow update policies. Technical report, University of California, Irvine, CA.Google Scholar
  • Chu C (1989) A paired combinational logit model for travel demand analysis. Proc. 5th World Conf. Transportation Res., 295–309.Google Scholar
  • Daganzo CF (1982) Unconstrained extremal formulation of some transportation equilibrium problems. Transportation Sci. 16(3):332–360.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Daganzo CF, Sheffi Y (1977) On stochastic models of traffic assignment. Transportation Sci. 11(3):253–274.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Daly A, Bierlaire M (2006) A general and operational representation of generalised extreme value models. Transportation Res. Part B Methodological 40(4):285–305.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Davis D, Yin W (2017) A three-operator splitting scheme and its optimization applications. Set-Valued Variance Anal. 25:829–858.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • De La Barra T, Perez B, Anez J (1993) Multidimensional path search and assignment. Proc. PTRC Summer Annual Meeting (Manchester, UK), 307–320.Google Scholar
  • Dial RB (1971) A probabilistic multipath traffic assignment model which obviates path enumeration. Transportation Res. 5(2):83–111.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Du M, Tan H, Chen A (2021) A faster path-based algorithm with Barzilai-Borwein step size for solving stochastic traffic equilibrium models. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 290(3):982–999.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Duncan LC, Watling DP, Connors RD, Rasmussen TK, Nielsen OA (2020) Path size logit route choice models: Issues with current models, a new internally consistent approach, and parameter estimation on a large-scale network with GPS data. Transportation Res. Part B Methodological 135:1–40.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Fisk C (1980) Some developments in equilibrium traffic assignment. Transportation Res. Part B Methodological 14(3):243–255.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Flötteröd G, Bierlaire M (2013) Metropolis–Hastings sampling of paths. Transportation Res. Part B Methodological 48:53–66.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Fosgerau M, McFadden DL (2012) A theory of the perturbed consumer with general budgets. NBER Working Paper No. 17953, National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
  • Fosgerau M, Frejinger E, Karlstrom A (2013) A link based network route choice model with unrestricted choice set. Transportation Res. Part B Methodological 56:70–80.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Fosgerau M, Paulsen M, Rasmussen TK (2022) A perturbed utility route choice model. Transportation Res. Part C Emerging Tech. 136:103514.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Fosgerau M, Lukawska M, Paulsen M, Rasmussen TK (2023) Bikeability and the induced demand for cycling. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 120(16):e2220515120.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Frejinger E, Bierlaire M, Ben-Akiva M (2009) Sampling of alternatives for route choice modeling. Transportation Res. Part B Methodological 43(10):984–994.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Hofbauer J, Sandholm WH (2002) On the global convergence of stochastic fictitious play. Econometrica 70(6):2265–2294.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Jayakrishnan R, Tsai WT, Prashker JN, Rajadhyaksha S (1994) A faster path-based algorithm for traffic assignment. Working Paper UCTC No. 191, The University of California Transportation Center, Berkeley, CA.Google Scholar
  • Larsson T, Migdalas A, Partriksson M (1993) A partial linearization method for the traffic assignment problem. Optimization 28(1):47–61.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • LeCun Y, Bengio Y, Hinton G (2015) Deep learning. Nature 521(7553):436–444.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Liang J, Luo T, Schonlieb CB (2022) Improving “fast iterative shrinkage-thresholding algorithm”: Faster, smarter, and greedier. SIAM J. Sci. Comput. 44(3):A1069–A1091.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Liu HX, He X, He B (2009) Method of successive weighted averages (MSWA) and self-regulated averaging schemes for solving stochastic user equilibrium problem. Network Spatial Econom. 9:485–503.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Maher M (1998) Algorithms for logit-based stochastic user equilibrium assignment. Transportation Res. Part B Methodological 32(8):539–549.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Mai T (2016) A method of integrating correlation structures for a generalized recursive route choice model. Transportation Res. Part B Methodological 93:146–161.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Mai T, Frejinger E (2022) Undiscounted recursive path choice models: Convergence properties and algorithms. Transportation Sci. 56(6):1469–1482.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Mai T, Fosgerau M, Frejinger E (2015) A nested recursive logit model for route choice analysis. Transportation Res. Part B Methodological 75:100–112.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • McFadden D (1978) Modelling the choice of residential location. Karlquist A, Snickars F, Weibull JW, eds. Spatial Interaction Theory and Planning Models, vol. 673 (North Holland, Amsterdam), 75–96.Google Scholar
  • McFadden D (1981) Econometric models of probabilistic choice. Manski C, McFadden D, eds. Structural Analysis of Discrete Data with Econometric Applications (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA), 198–272.Google Scholar
  • Milgrom P, Segal I (2002) Envelope theorems for arbitrary choice sets. Econometrica 70(2):583–601.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Nesterov YE (1983) A method of solving a convex programming problem with convergence rate O(1k2). Doklady Akademii Nauk 269:543–547.Google Scholar
  • Nie YM (2010) A class of bush-based algorithms for the traffic assignment problem. Transportation Res. Part B Methodological 44(1):73–89.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Nie Y (2012) A note on Bar-Gera’s algorithm for the origin-based traffic assignment problem. Transportation Sci. 46(1):27–38.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Oyama Y (2023) Capturing positive network attributes during the estimation of recursive logit models: A prism-based approach. Transportation Res. Part C Emerging Tech. 147:104014.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Oyama Y, Hato E (2019) Prism-based path set restriction for solving Markovian traffic assignment problem. Transportation Res. Part B Methodological 122:528–546.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Oyama Y, Hara Y, Akamatsu T (2022) Markovian traffic equilibrium assignment based on network generalized extreme value model. Transportation Res. Part B Methodological 155:135–159.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Polyak BT (1964) Some methods of speeding up the convergence of iteration methods. USSR Comput. Math. Math. Phys. 4(5):1–17.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Powell WB, Sheffi Y (1982) The convergence of equilibrium algorithms with predetermined step sizes. Transportation Sci. 16(1):45–55.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Prato CG (2009) Route choice modeling: Past, present and future research directions. J. Choice Modelling 2(1):65–100.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Prato CG, Bekhor S (2006) Applying branch-and-bound technique to route choice set generation. Transportation Res. Rec. 1985(1):19–28.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Rockafellar RT (1970) Convex Analysis (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ).CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Sheffi Y (1985) Urban Transportation Networks, vol. 6 (Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ).Google Scholar
  • Sheffi Y, Powell WB (1982) An algorithm for the equilibrium assignment problem with random link times. Networks 12(2):191–207.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Sørensen JRV, Fosgerau M (2022) How McFadden met Rockafellar and learned to do more with less. J. Math. Econom. 100:102629.Google Scholar
  • Sutskever I, Martens J, Dahl G, Hinton G (2013) On the importance of initialization and momentum in deep learning. Proc. Internat. Conf. Machine Learn., vol. 28 (PMLR, New York), 1139–1147.Google Scholar
  • Ton D, Duives D, Cats O, Hoogendoorn S (2018) Evaluating a data-driven approach for choice set identification using GPS bicycle route choice data from Amsterdam. Travel Behav. Soc. 13:105–117.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Tseng P (2001) Convergence of a block coordinate descent method for nondifferentiable minimization. J. Optim. Theory Appl. 109:475–494.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Vovsha P, Bekhor S (1998) Link-nested logit model of route choice: Overcoming route overlapping problem. Transportation Res. Rec. 1645(98):133–142.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Watling DP, Rasmussen TK, Prato CG, Nielsen OA (2018) Stochastic user equilibrium with a bounded choice model. Transportation Res. Part B Methodological 114:254–280.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Wen CH, Koppelman F (2001) The generalized nested logit model. Transportation Res. Part B Methodological 35(7):627–641.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Xie C, Waller ST (2012) Stochastic traffic assignment, Lagrangian dual, and unconstrained convex optimization. Transportation Res. Part B Methodological 46(8):1023–1042.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Yao R, Bekhor S (2022) A variational autoencoder approach for choice set generation and implicit perception of alternatives in choice modeling. Transportation Res. Part B Methodological 158:273–294.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Zhang J, He T, Sra S, Jadbabaie A (2019) Why gradient clipping accelerates training: A theoretical justification for adaptivity. Preprint, submitted May 28, https://arxiv.org/abs/1905.11881.Google Scholar
INFORMS site uses cookies to store information on your computer. Some are essential to make our site work; Others help us improve the user experience. By using this site, you consent to the placement of these cookies. Please read our Privacy Statement to learn more.