From Aggregate Methods to Microsimulation

Jason Lemp · Laura Beth McWethy · Kara Maria Kockelman

30 citations0/0 files storedTransportation Research Record Journal of the Transportation Research Board

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Transportation Planning and Optimization Traffic control and management demographic modeling and climate adaptation

Abstract

Two competing approaches to travel demand modeling exist today. The more traditional four-step travel demand models rely on aggregate demographic data at a traffic analysis zone (TAZ) level. Activity-based microsimulation methods use more robust behavioral theory while focusing on individuals and households. Although the vast majority of U.S. metropolitan planning organizations continue to rely on traditional models, many modelers believe that activity-based approaches promise greater predictive capability, more accurate forecasts, and more realistic sensitivity to policy changes. Little work has examined in detail the benefits of activity-based models relative to more traditional approaches. To understand better the trade-offs between these two methodologies, results produced by both were modeled in an Austin, Texas, application. Three scenarios are examined: a base scenario, a scenario with expanded capacity along two key freeways, and a centralized-employment scenario. Results of the analysis revealed several differences in model performance and accuracy in terms of replicating travel survey and traffic count data. Such distinctions largely emerged through differing model assumptions. In general, activity-based models were more sensitive to changes in model inputs, supporting the notion that aggregate models ignore important behavioral distinctions across the population. However, they involved more effort and care in data manipulation, model calibration, and application to mimic behavioral processes better at a finer resolution. Such efforts help ensure that synthetic populations match key criteria and that activity schedules match surveyed behaviors, while being realistic and consistent across household members.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 30 citations exist upstream.

References

1978MODELING THE CHOICE OF RESIDENTIAL LOCATION 1979Spatial interaction theory and planning models 2000ALBATROSS : a learning based transportation oriented simulation system 1998Travel estimation techniques for urban planning 1999Activity-Based Modeling of Travel Demand 2003Explicit Modeling of Joint Travel by Household Members: Statistical Evidence and Applied Approach 2005Activity-Based Travel Forecasting Models in the United States: Progress since 1995 and Prospects for the Future 2004Credit-Based Congestion Pricing: Travel, Land Value, and Welfare Impacts

Cited by

2010Application of UrbanSim to the Austin, Texas, Region: Integrated-Model Forecasts for the Year 2030 2008Destination Choice in Daily Activity Travel 2015A comparative analysis of traditional four-step and activity-based travel demand modeling: a case study of Tampa, Florida 2015Mode Choice Modeling Using Personalized Travel Time and Cost Data 2015Comparing microscopic activity-based and traditional models of travel demand : an Austin area case study

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.