IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/transa/v147y2021icp339-349.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Estimating the uncertainty of traffic forecasts from their historical accuracy

Author

Listed:
  • Hoque, Jawad Mahmud
  • Erhardt, Gregory D.
  • Schmitt, David
  • Chen, Mei
  • Wachs, Martin

Abstract

Traffic forecasters may find value in expressing the uncertainty of their forecasts as a range of expected outcomes. Traditional methods for estimating such uncertainty windows rely on assumptions about reasonable ranges of travel demand forecasting model inputs and parameters. Rather than relying on assumptions, we demonstrate how to use empirical measures of past forecast accuracy to estimate the uncertainty in future forecasts. We develop an econometric framework based on quantile regression to estimate an expected (median) traffic volume as a function of the forecast, and a range within which we expect 90% of traffic volumes to fall. Using data on observed versus forecast traffic for 3912 observations from 1291 road projects, we apply this framework to estimate a model of overall uncertainty and a full model that considers the effect of project attributes. Our results show that the median post-opening traffic is 6% lower than forecast. The expected range of outcomes varies significantly with the forecast volume, the forecast method, the project type, the functional class, the time span and the unemployment rate at the time forecast is made. For example, consider a 5-year forecast for an existing arterial roadway made in 2019 when the state unemployment rate was 4% using a travel model. If a travel model predicted 30,000 Average Daily Traffic (ADT) on this road, our results suggest that 90% of future traffic volumes would fall between 19,000 and 36,000 ADT. A forecaster can apply the resulting equations to calculate an uncertainty window for their project, or they can estimate new quantile regression equations from locally collected forecast accuracy data. Aided by decision intervals, such uncertainty windows can help planners determine whether a forecast deviation would change a project decision.

Suggested Citation

  • Hoque, Jawad Mahmud & Erhardt, Gregory D. & Schmitt, David & Chen, Mei & Wachs, Martin, 2021. "Estimating the uncertainty of traffic forecasts from their historical accuracy," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 339-349.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:transa:v:147:y:2021:i:c:p:339-349
    DOI: 10.1016/j.tra.2021.03.015
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0965856421000793
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.tra.2021.03.015?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dawn Holland & Aurélie Delannoy & Tatiana Fic & Ian Hurst & Stephen le Roux & Iana Liadze & Ali Orazgani & Paweł Paluchowski, 2012. "Appendix B: Forecast Detail," National Institute Economic Review, National Institute of Economic and Social Research, vol. 219(1), pages 34-40, January.
    2. Simon Kirby & Iana Liadze, 2015. "Appendix A: Summary of key forecast assumptions," National Institute Economic Review, National Institute of Economic and Social Research, vol. 233(1), pages 30-36, August.
    3. Rajagopal, 2012. "Forecasting and Fudge Factors Modelling," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: Darwinian Fitness in the Global Marketplace, chapter 6, pages 164-190, Palgrave Macmillan.
    4. Adriano S. Koshiyama & Tatiana Escovedo & Douglas M. Dias & Marley M. B. R. Vellasco & Marco A. C. Pacheco, 2012. "Combining Forecasts: A Genetic Programming Approach," International Journal of Natural Computing Research (IJNCR), IGI Global, vol. 3(3), pages 41-58, July.
    5. Dawn Holland, 2013. "Appendix A: Summary of Key Forecast Assumptions," National Institute Economic Review, National Institute of Economic and Social Research, vol. 225(1), pages 32-37, August.
    6. David Hartgen, 2013. "Hubris or humility? Accuracy issues for the next 50 years of travel demand modeling," Transportation, Springer, vol. 40(6), pages 1133-1157, November.
    7. Lyons, Glenn & Davidson, Cody, 2016. "Guidance for transport planning and policymaking in the face of an uncertain future," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 104-116.
    8. Mei-Mei Kuo & Shih-Wen Tai & Bing-Huei Lin, 2012. "Forecasting Term Structure of HIBOR Swap Rates," The International Journal of Business and Finance Research, The Institute for Business and Finance Research, vol. 6(4), pages 87-100.
    9. Bent Flyvbjerg, 2007. "Policy and Planning for Large-Infrastructure Projects: Problems, Causes, Cures," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 34(4), pages 578-597, August.
    10. Flyvbjerg, Bent, 2005. "Measuring inaccuracy in travel demand forecasting: methodological considerations regarding ramp up and sampling," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 39(6), pages 522-530, July.
    11. Hugosson, Muriel Beser, 2005. "Quantifying uncertainties in a national forecasting model," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 39(6), pages 531-547, July.
    12. El-Shagi, Makram & Giesen, Sebastian & Jung, Alexander, 2012. "Does Central Bank Staff Beat Private Forecasters?," IWH Discussion Papers 5/2012, Halle Institute for Economic Research (IWH).
    13. Gerard Jong & Andrew Daly & Marits Pieters & Stephen Miller & Ronald Plasmeijer & Frank Hofman, 2007. "Uncertainty in traffic forecasts: literature review and new results for The Netherlands," Transportation, Springer, vol. 34(4), pages 375-395, July.
    14. Manzo, Stefano & Nielsen, Otto Anker & Prato, Carlo Giacomo, 2015. "How uncertainty in input and parameters influences transport model :output A four-stage model case-study," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 64-72.
    15. Michelle L. Barnes & Anthony W. Hughes, 2002. "A quantile regression analysis of the cross section of stock market returns," Working Papers 02-2, Federal Reserve Bank of Boston.
    16. Yong Zhao & Kara Maria Kockelman, 2002. "The propagation of uncertainty through travel demand models: An exploratory analysis," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 36(1), pages 145-163.
    17. Odeck, James & Welde, Morten, 2017. "The accuracy of toll road traffic forecasts: An econometric evaluation," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 73-85.
    18. Gerrit-Jan Knaap & Daniel Engelberg & Uri Avin & Sevgi Erdogan & Fred Ducca & Timothy F. Welch & Nicholas Finio & Rolf Moeckel & Harutyun Shahumyan, 2020. "Modeling Sustainability Scenarios in the Baltimore–Washington (DC) Region," Journal of the American Planning Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 86(2), pages 250-263, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Parthasarathi, Pavithra & Levinson, David, 2010. "Post-construction evaluation of traffic forecast accuracy," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 17(6), pages 428-443, November.
    2. Maria Börjesson & Jonas Eliasson & Mattias Lundberg, 2014. "Is CBA Ranking of Transport Investments Robust?," Journal of Transport Economics and Policy, University of Bath, vol. 48(2), pages 189-204, May.
    3. Walker, Joan L. & Chatman, Daniel & Daziano, Ricardo & Erhardt, Gregory & Gao, Song & Mahmassani, Hani & Ory, David & Sall, Elizabeth & Bhat, Chandra & Chim, Nicholas & Daniels, Clint & Gardner, Brian, 2019. "Advancing the Science of Travel Demand Forecasting," Institute of Transportation Studies, Research Reports, Working Papers, Proceedings qt0v1906ts, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Berkeley.
    4. Manzo, Stefano & Nielsen, Otto Anker & Prato, Carlo Giacomo, 2015. "How uncertainty in input and parameters influences transport model :output A four-stage model case-study," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 64-72.
    5. Aguas, Oriana & Bachmann, Chris, 2022. "Assessing the effects of input uncertainties on the outputs of a freight demand model," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(C).
    6. Börjesson, Maria & Jonsson, R. Daniel & Berglund, Svante & Almström, Peter, 2014. "Land-use impacts in transport appraisal," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 82-91.
    7. Westin, Jonas & de Jong, Gerard & Vierth, Inge & Krüger, Niclas & Karlsson, Rune & Johansson, Magnus, 2015. "Baserunning - analyzing the sensitivity and economies of scale of the Swedish national freight model system using stochastic production-consumption-matrices," Working papers in Transport Economics 2015:10, CTS - Centre for Transport Studies Stockholm (KTH and VTI), revised 15 Sep 2016.
    8. Love, Peter E.D. & Ika, Lavagnon A. & Ahiaga-Dagbui, Dominic D., 2019. "On de-bunking ‘fake news’ in a post truth era: Why does the Planning Fallacy explanation for cost overruns fall short?," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 397-408.
    9. Gerard Jong & Andrew Daly & Marits Pieters & Stephen Miller & Ronald Plasmeijer & Frank Hofman, 2007. "Uncertainty in traffic forecasts: literature review and new results for The Netherlands," Transportation, Springer, vol. 34(4), pages 375-395, July.
    10. Sanko, Nobuhiro & Morikawa, Takayuki & Nagamatsu, Yoshitaka, 2013. "Post-project evaluation of travel demand forecasts: Implications from the case of a Japanese railway," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 27(C), pages 209-218.
    11. David Hartgen, 2013. "Hubris or humility? Accuracy issues for the next 50 years of travel demand modeling," Transportation, Springer, vol. 40(6), pages 1133-1157, November.
    12. Glenn Lyons & Greg Marsden, 2021. "Opening out and closing down: the treatment of uncertainty in transport planning’s forecasting paradigm," Transportation, Springer, vol. 48(2), pages 595-616, April.
    13. Yang, Chao & Chen, Anthony & Xu, Xiangdong & Wong, S.C., 2013. "Sensitivity-based uncertainty analysis of a combined travel demand model," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 225-244.
    14. Massimo Florio & Silvia Vignetti, 2013. "The use of ex post Cost-Benefit Analysis to assess the long-term effects of Major Infrastructure Projects," Working Papers 201302, CSIL Centre for Industrial Studies.
    15. Sevcíková, Hana & Raftery, Adrian E. & Waddell, Paul A., 2011. "Uncertain benefits: Application of Bayesian melding to the Alaskan Way Viaduct in Seattle," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 45(6), pages 540-553, July.
    16. Nobuhiro Sanko, 2017. "Temporal transferability: trade-off between data newness and the number of observations for forecasting travel demand," Transportation, Springer, vol. 44(6), pages 1403-1420, November.
    17. Kim, Kangsoo & Baek, Seunghan & Cho, Hyejin, 2021. "Impact of a Preliminary Feasibility Study on the accuracy of traffic forecasts in the case of Korea," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 197-211.
    18. Hironori Kato & Yuichiro Kaneko & Masashi Inoue, 2010. "Comparative analysis of transit assignment: evidence from urban railway system in the Tokyo Metropolitan Area," Transportation, Springer, vol. 37(5), pages 775-799, September.
    19. West, Jens & Börjesson, Maria & Engelson, Leonid, 2016. "Accuracy of the Gothenburg congestion charges forecast," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 266-277.
    20. Odeck, James & Kjerkreit, Anne, 2019. "The accuracy of benefit-cost analyses (BCAs) in transportation: An ex-post evaluation of road projects," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 277-294.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:transa:v:147:y:2021:i:c:p:339-349. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/547/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.