IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v12y2020i4p1406-d320563.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Mixed Logit Model Based on Improved Nonlinear Utility Functions: A Market Shares Solution Method of Different Railway Traffic Modes

Author

Listed:
  • Bing Han

    (School of Computer and Information Technology, Beijing Jiaotong University, Beijing 100044, China)

  • Shuang Ren

    (School of Computer and Information Technology, Beijing Jiaotong University, Beijing 100044, China)

  • Jingjing Bao

    (Transportation and Economics Research Institute, China Academy of Railway Sciences, Beijing 100081, China)

Abstract

In recent years, with the development of high-speed railway in China, the railway operating mileages and passenger transport capacity have increased rapidly. Due to the high density of trains and the limited capacity of railways, it is necessary to solve market shares of different railway traffic modes in order to adjust the operation plans appropriately and run railway passenger transport products in line with passenger demand. Therefore, the purpose of this paper is to calculate market shares by formulating a mixed logit model based on improved nonlinear utility functions taking different factors into consideration, such as seat grades, fares, running time, passenger income levels and so on. Firstly according to maximum likelihood estimation, the likelihood function of this mixed logit model is proposed to maximize utility of all passenger groups. After that, we propose two improved algorithms based on the simulated annealing algorithm (ISAA-CC and ISAA-SS) to estimate the unknown parameters and solve the optimal solution of this model in order to enhance the computational efficiency. Finally, a real-world instance with related data of Beijing–Tianjin corridor, is implemented to demonstrate the performance and effectiveness of the proposed approaches. In addition, by performing this numerical experiment and comparing these two improved algorithms with the traditional Newton method, the ant colony algorithm and the simulated annealing algorithm, we prove that the improved algorithms we developed are superior to others in the optimal solution.

Suggested Citation

  • Bing Han & Shuang Ren & Jingjing Bao, 2020. "Mixed Logit Model Based on Improved Nonlinear Utility Functions: A Market Shares Solution Method of Different Railway Traffic Modes," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(4), pages 1-25, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:4:p:1406-:d:320563
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/4/1406/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/4/1406/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lee, Joon-Kyu & Yoo, Kwang-Eui & Song, Ki-Han, 2016. "A study on travelers' transport mode choice behavior using the mixed logit model: A case study of the Seoul-Jeju route," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 56(PB), pages 131-137.
    2. Kenneth E. Train & Daniel L. McFadden & Moshe Ben-Akiva, 1987. "The Demand for Local Telephone Service: A Fully Discrete Model of Residential Calling Patterns and Service Choices," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 18(1), pages 109-123, Spring.
    3. Daniel McFadden & Kenneth Train, 2000. "Mixed MNL models for discrete response," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 15(5), pages 447-470.
    4. David Hensher & William Greene, 2003. "The Mixed Logit model: The state of practice," Transportation, Springer, vol. 30(2), pages 133-176, May.
    5. Jou, Rong-Chang & Hensher, David A. & Hsu, Tzu-Lan, 2011. "Airport ground access mode choice behavior after the introduction of a new mode: A case study of Taoyuan International Airport in Taiwan," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 47(3), pages 371-381, May.
    6. Train,Kenneth E., 2009. "Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521766555.
    7. Hess, Stephane & Polak, John W., 2005. "Mixed logit modelling of airport choice in multi-airport regions," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 11(2), pages 59-68.
    8. Henry Liu & Xiaozheng He & Bingsheng He, 2009. "Method of Successive Weighted Averages (MSWA) and Self-Regulated Averaging Schemes for Solving Stochastic User Equilibrium Problem," Networks and Spatial Economics, Springer, vol. 9(4), pages 485-503, December.
    9. Hensher,David A. & Rose,John M. & Greene,William H., 2015. "Applied Choice Analysis," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781107465923.
    10. Daniel McFadden, 1977. "Modelling the Choice of Residential Location," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 477, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
    11. Park, Yonghwa & Ha, Hun-Koo, 2006. "Analysis of the impact of high-speed railroad service on air transport demand," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 42(2), pages 95-104, March.
    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. Haghani, Milad & Bliemer, Michiel C.J. & Hensher, David A., 2021. "The landscape of econometric discrete choice modelling research," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 40(C).
    2. Birolini, Sebastian & Malighetti, Paolo & Redondi, Renato & Deforza, Paolo, 2019. "Access mode choice to low-cost airports: Evaluation of new direct rail services at Milan-Bergamo airport," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 113-124.
    3. Fosgerau, Mogens & Bierlaire, Michel, 2007. "A practical test for the choice of mixing distribution in discrete choice models," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 41(7), pages 784-794, August.
    4. Bernard Fortin & Nicolas Jacquemet & Bruce Shearer, 2008. "Policy Analysis in Health-Services Market: Accounting for Quality and Quantity," Annals of Economics and Statistics, GENES, issue 91-92, pages 293-319.
    5. Chiou, Lesley & Walker, Joan L., 2007. "Masking identification of discrete choice models under simulation methods," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 141(2), pages 683-703, December.
    6. Schueftan, Alejandra & Aravena, Claudia & Reyes, René, 2021. "Financing energy efficiency retrofits in Chilean households: The role of financial instruments, savings and uncertainty in energy transition," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(C).
    7. Campbell, Danny, 2007. "Combining mixed logit models and random effects models to identify the determinants of willingness to pay for rural landscape improvements," 81st Annual Conference, April 2-4, 2007, Reading University, UK 7975, Agricultural Economics Society.
    8. Immerzeel, Bart & Vermaat, Jan E. & Juutinen, Artti & Pouta, Eija & Artell, Janne, 2022. "Appreciation of Nordic landscapes and how the bioeconomy might change that: Results from a discrete choice experiment," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 113(C).
    9. Stephane Hess & Denis Bolduc & John Polak, 2010. "Random covariance heterogeneity in discrete choice models," Transportation, Springer, vol. 37(3), pages 391-411, May.
    10. Grammatikopoulou, Ioanna & Badura, Tomas & Vačkářová, Davina, 2020. "Public preferences for post 2020 agri-environmental policy in the Czech Republic: A choice experiment approach," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    11. Lingjuan Chen & Yijing Zhao & Zupeng Liu & Xinran Yang, 2022. "Construction of Commuters’ Multi-Mode Choice Model Based on Public Transport Operation Data," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(22), pages 1-20, November.
    12. Ioanna Grammatikopoulou & Janne Artell & Turo Hjerppe & Eija Pouta, 2020. "A Mire of Discount Rates: Delaying Conservation Payment Schedules in a Choice Experiment," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 77(3), pages 615-639, November.
    13. Zhou, Heng & Norman, Richard & Xia, Jianhong(Cecilia) & Hughes, Brett & Kelobonye, Keone & Nikolova, Gabi & Falkmer, Torbjorn, 2020. "Analysing travel mode and airline choice using latent class modelling: A case study in Western Australia," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 187-205.
    14. Jianhua Wang & Jiaye Ge & Yuting Ma, 2018. "Urban Chinese Consumers’ Willingness to Pay for Pork with Certified Labels: A Discrete Choice Experiment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-14, February.
    15. Qian, Lixian & Grisolía, Jose M. & Soopramanien, Didier, 2019. "The impact of service and government-policy attributes on consumer preferences for electric vehicles in China," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 70-84.
    16. Scaccia, Luisa & Marcucci, Edoardo & Gatta, Valerio, 2023. "Prediction and confidence intervals of willingness-to-pay for mixed logit models," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 167(C), pages 54-78.
    17. Frick, Bernd & Barros, Carlos Pestana & Prinz, Joachim, 2010. "Analysing head coach dismissals in the German "Bundesliga" with a mixed logit approach," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 200(1), pages 151-159, January.
    18. Meredith Fowlie, 2010. "Emissions Trading, Electricity Restructuring, and Investment in Pollution Abatement," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 100(3), pages 837-869, June.
    19. Cho, Woohyun & Windle, Robert J. & Dresner, Martin E., 2017. "The impact of operational exposure and value-of-time on customer choice: Evidence from the airline industry," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 455-471.
    20. de Ayala, Amaia & Hoyos, David & Mariel, Petr, 2015. "Suitability of discrete choice experiments for landscape management under the European Landscape Convention," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(2), pages 79-96.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:4:p:1406-:d:320563. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.