P = The model satisfied the Luce s axiom of independence of irrelevant alternatives (IIA) which can be stated as

Similar documents
Transportation Theory and Applications

Modal Split. Lecture Notes in Transportation Systems Engineering. Prof. Tom V. Mathew. 1 Overview 1. 2 Mode choice 2

Discrete Choice Model for Public Transport Development in Kuala Lumpur

Choice Probabilities. Logit Choice Probabilities Derivation. Choice Probabilities. Basic Econometrics in Transportation.

Econometrics II Multinomial Choice Models

The Multinomial Logit Model Revisited: A Semiparametric Approach in Discrete Choice Analysis

Practical issues with DTA

Lecture 1: Logit. Quantitative Methods for Economic Analysis. Seyed Ali Madani Zadeh and Hosein Joshaghani. Sharif University of Technology

3 Logit. 3.1 Choice Probabilities

Drawbacks of MNL. MNL may not work well in either of the following cases due to its IIA property:

Logit with multiple alternatives

Car-Rider Segmentation According to Riding Status and Investment in Car Mobility

Nested logit. Michel Bierlaire

Nested logit. Michel Bierlaire

Industrial Organization

15. Multinomial Outcomes A. Colin Cameron Pravin K. Trivedi Copyright 2006

Making Transportation Sustainable: Insights from Germany

Development of a Risk Analysis Model for Producing High-Speed Rail Ridership and Revenue Forecasts

An Examination of Some Issues Related to Benefit Measurement and the Benefit Cost Ratio

Congestion Charge and Return Schemes on Modal Choice between Road and Railroad

THE IMPACT OF PRICE CHANGE ON CONSUMER CHOICE OF AUTOMOBILES

Transportation Research Forum

Holding and slack in a deterministic bus-route model

Calibration of Nested-Logit Mode-Choice Models for Florida

A MODIFIED MULTINOMIAL LOGIT MODEL OF ROUTE CHOICE FOR DRIVERS USING THE TRANSPORTATION INFORMATION SYSTEM

Rational Inattention to Discrete Choices: A New Foundation for. the Multinomial Logit Model

3. Multinomial response models

Appendix C: Modeling Process

The use of logit model for modal split estimation: a case study

CHAPTER 10 DETERMINING HOW COSTS BEHAVE. Difference in costs Difference in machine-hours $5,400 $4,000. = $0.35 per machine-hour

Estimating Market Power in Differentiated Product Markets

Estimating Mixed Logit Models with Large Choice Sets. Roger H. von Haefen, NC State & NBER Adam Domanski, NOAA July 2013

Americans AV Preferences: Dynamic Ride-Sharing, Privacy & Long-Distance Mode Choices. Dr. Kara Kockelman & Krishna Murthy Gurumurthy

Model Calibration in MATLAB. Sam Bailey, PRUDENTIAL

Paper 3 Household Segmentation Model

Chapter 5. Continuous Random Variables and Probability Distributions. 5.1 Continuous Random Variables

Nonlinear Econometric Analysis (ECO 722) Answers to Homework 4

Introduction To Macroeconomics

5.5: LINEAR AUTOMOBILE DEPRECIATION OBJECTIVES

Analysis of the evolution of travelers mode captivity using logit modelling; with application on Greater Cairo

MORTGAGE LOAN MARKET IN A DISCRETE CHOICE FRAMEWORK 1. Ákos Aczél 2. The Central Bank of Hungary. Budapest, Hungary

A note on the nested Logit model

Economic Impact of Public Transportation Investment 2014 UPDATE

TSHWANE BRT: Development of a Traffic Model for the BRT Corridor Phase 1A Lines 1 and 2

Rational Inattention to Discrete Choices: A New Foundation for the Multinomial Logit Model

Diagnostic Evaluation of Public Transportation Mode Choice in Addis Ababa

Automobile Ownership Model

Stated Choice-Based Performance Evaluation of Selected Transportation Control Measures and Their Trans er Across Sites

Using Activity Based Models for Policy Analysis

Data Analytics (CS40003) Practice Set IV (Topic: Probability and Sampling Distribution)

5. What is the Savings-Investment Spending Identity? Savings = Investment Spending for the economy as a whole

Stochastic Programming in Gas Storage and Gas Portfolio Management. ÖGOR-Workshop, September 23rd, 2010 Dr. Georg Ostermaier

1 Excess burden of taxation

Section 5.6: HISTORICAL AND EXPONENTIAL DEPRECIATION OBJECTIVES

Chapter 4: Commonly Used Distributions. Statistics for Engineers and Scientists Fourth Edition William Navidi

On Linking Microsimulation and Computable General Equilibrium Models Using Exact Aggregation of Heterogeneous Discrete-choice choice Making Agents

Lecture 7: Bayesian approach to MAB - Gittins index

2016 Q4 CUSTOMER SATISFACTION SURVEY

A Self Instructing Course in Mode Choice Modeling: Multinomial and Nested Logit Models

POLICY AND PROCEDURE STATEMENT

Choice Models. Session 1. K. Sudhir Yale School of Management. Spring

Log-Robust Portfolio Management

Use of Disaggregate Travel Demand Models to Analyze Car Pooling Policy Incentives

Studying Sample Sizes for demand analysis Analysis on the size of calibration and hold-out sample for choice model appraisal

Journey Risk Management for Pune City

GT CREST-LMA. Pricing-to-Market, Trade Costs, and International Relative Prices

Subject: Creation of an Eco Pass

MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT

Economic Growth: Malthus and Solow Copyright 2014 Pearson Education, Inc.

DRAFT. Relationship of Asset Condition Rating to Transit System Performance. Prepared for. Transportation Research Board

MSM Course 1 Flashcards. Associative Property. base (in numeration) Commutative Property. Distributive Property. Chapter 1 (p.

Repeated Overshoot and Collapse Behavior: An Example from the Petroleum Industry

Rational Choice and Moral Monotonicity. James C. Cox

Illustration 1: Determinants of Firm Debt

MEMORANDUM. For the purpose of this analysis, a No Build Alternative and a Build Alternative were under consideration.

Grade 7: Chapter 1 Practice Test & Vocabulary Review

Forecasting Asset Conditions with Decay Curves April 16, 2012 Keith Gates, PE Senior Analyst, Strategic Planning & Analysis

Statistical Analysis of Traffic Injury Severity: The Case Study of Addis Ababa, Ethiopia

Economics of Public Transport. - Dr. Sanjay K. Singh Department of Humanities and Scoal Sciences Indian Institute of Technology Kanpur

Online Appendix for Does mobile money affect saving behavior? Evidence from a developing country Journal of African Economies

Cost Volume Profit. LO 1:Types of Costs

might be done. The utility. rather than

Chapter 6. Production. Introduction. Production Decisions of a Firm. Production Decisions of a Firm

CHAPTER 2 EMPIRICAL AND UTILITY APPROACHES IN MODAL SPLIT ANALYSIS

FUNDING TRANSPORTATION PROJECTS. Partners in Planning March 8, 2014

Temptation and Self-control

Development of a Mode and Destination Type Joint Choice Model for Hurricane Evacuation

HRTPO Strategic Campaign and Vision Plan for Passenger Rail

11/15/2017. Domain: Range: y-intercept: Asymptote: End behavior: Increasing: Decreasing:

Fairfield Public Schools

Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) Metropolitan Planning Organization (AMPO) Annual Conference. Prepared for

International Finance. Case Presentation

Models of Multinomial Qualitative Response

PUBLIC TRANSPORT TRIP GENERATION PARAMETERS FOR SOUTH AFRICA

An Evaluation of the Priorities Associated With the Provision of Traffic Information in Real Time

FACULTY OF SCIENCE DEPARTMENT OF STATISTICS

International Trade and Income Differences

Decision-making under conditions of risk and uncertainty

Impacts of Amtrak Service Expansion in Kansas

S = 1,2,3, 4,5,6 occurs

Transcription:

1.4 Multinomial logit model The multinomial logit model calculates the probability of choosing mode. The multinomial logit model is of the following form and the probability of using mode I, p is given by U i = Utility of mode i U r = utility of mode r (r = 1,2,3 I,...,m) A term relating to the subject mode I appear as the numerator and the summation of the similar terms corresponding to all competing modes in placed in the denominator. Disaggregate Behavioral models are i) Policy oriented ii) Geographically transferable iii) Data efficient The model satisfied the Luce s axiom of independence of irrelevant alternatives (IIA) which can be stated as Where any two alternatives have a non-zero probability of being chosen, the ratio of one probability over the other is unaffected by the pressure or absence of any additional alternatives in the choice set. Example: Car vs. blue bus and red bus Say car is competing with blue bus in a traffic scenario. In this case the probability of selection of car and blue bus is equal i.e. 0.50 in this case the ratio of their probabilities comes out to be 1.0. Now another bus is introduced as a competitor in the new situation the probability of selection of either of the buses or the car becomes 0.33 and the ratio of previous two competitor modes again remains 1.0.

Initially, this property was considered as advantages of the model, as it allows treating the new alternative problem neatly. But same property is perceived as disadvantages in case the correlated alternatives are present and multinomial logit model fails in that condition. This means that in the example taken above blue bus and red bus belong to the same segment and therefore competes with each other. These together compete with the car mode. In that case the probability of choosing a car or bus mod should be equal i.e. 0.50. Further within bus category the probability of choosing either a blue bus or a red bus should again be equal i.e. 0.50. On the whole, the probability of choosing either bus will become 0.50*0.50=0.25 and that of car will remain 0.50. This will satisfy the probability i.e. the sum of probabilities should be equal to 1.0. 4.5.1 Calibration of multinomial logit model The general equation of multinomial logit model is of the following form and the probability of using model i & p is given by (i) U i = Utility of mode i U r = Utility of mode r (r = 1, 2, 3, - - -,I, - - - m) The general form of this equation resembles the fractional term employed by the gravity model of trip distribution. A term relating to the subject mode appears as the numerator and the summation of the similar term corresponding to all competing modes is placed in the denominator this specification ensure that all trip have been estimated to occurs on a specific interchange are assigned to the available modes; That is the following trip balance equation is satisfied (ii)

Equation (ii) would still be satisfied by writing the proportion attracted by each mode as For reasons that lie beyond the scope of this book the logistic transformation of the utilities [Eq.-(i)] is preferred Case Studies:- A calibration study result in the following utility equation U K = a K -0.025X 1-0.032X 2-0.015X 3-0.002X 4 X 1 = Access plus egress time, in min X 2 = Waiting time, in min X 3 = Line, haul time, in min X 4 = Out of pocket costs, in Rs K = Subject Mode The trip distribution forecast for a particular interchange was a target year volume of Q ij = 5000 Person trip per day. During the target year trip maker on this particular interchange will have the choice between the private automobile (A) and a local bus system (B). The target year service attributes of the two competing modes have been estimated to be Table 4.2 Attribute X1 X2 X3 X4 Automobile 5 0 20 100 Local bus 10 15 40 50

Assuming that the calibrated mode specific constant are 0.00 for the automobile mode (i.e. base mode) and -0.10 for the bus mode, apply the logit model to estimate the target year market share of the two modes and resulting fare box revenue of the bus system. Solution: The utility equation yield U (A) = 0.00 - (0.025*5) - (0.032*0) - (0.015*20) - (0.002*100) = -0.625 And U (B) = -1.530 According to the logit equation (1) P (A) = 0.71 & P (B) = 0.29 Therefore the market share of each mode is Q ij (A) = (0.71*5000) = 3550 trips/day Q ij (B) = (0.29*5000) = 1450 trips/day The fare box revenue estimated is (1450 trips/day)*(rs: 0.50/trip) = Rs: 725 per day. Discussion: The terms of the utility function used in this example are negative quantities they represent cost (i.e. disutility) components. The more negative quantities is, the less attractive the mode will be. Because of the exponential transformation of the utilities, the market shares are not directly proportional to the magnitude of utility. Division of the numerator and denominator of equation (i) by e U(A) results in the following form P (B) = & P (A) =

Where U* is the difference in the utilities of two modes.