IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/1907.07036.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Information processing constraints in travel behaviour modelling: A generative learning approach

Author

Listed:
  • Melvin Wong
  • Bilal Farooq

Abstract

Travel decisions tend to exhibit sensitivity to uncertainty and information processing constraints. These behavioural conditions can be characterized by a generative learning process. We propose a data-driven generative model version of rational inattention theory to emulate these behavioural representations. We outline the methodology of the generative model and the associated learning process as well as provide an intuitive explanation of how this process captures the value of prior information in the choice utility specification. We demonstrate the effects of information heterogeneity on a travel choice, analyze the econometric interpretation, and explore the properties of our generative model. Our findings indicate a strong correlation with rational inattention behaviour theory, which suggest that individuals may ignore certain exogenous variables and rely on prior information for evaluating decisions under uncertainty. Finally, the principles demonstrated in this study can be formulated as a generalized entropy and utility based multinomial logit model.

Suggested Citation

  • Melvin Wong & Bilal Farooq, 2019. "Information processing constraints in travel behaviour modelling: A generative learning approach," Papers 1907.07036, arXiv.org, revised Jul 2019.
  • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:1907.07036
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/1907.07036
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Vij, Akshay & Krueger, Rico, 2017. "Random taste heterogeneity in discrete choice models: Flexible nonparametric finite mixture distributions," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 76-101.
    2. Wong, Melvin & Farooq, Bilal & Bilodeau, Guillaume-Alexandre, 2018. "Discriminative conditional restricted Boltzmann machine for discrete choice and latent variable modelling," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 29(C), pages 152-168.
    3. David M. Blei & Alp Kucukelbir & Jon D. McAuliffe, 2017. "Variational Inference: A Review for Statisticians," Journal of the American Statistical Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 112(518), pages 859-877, April.
    4. Jakub Steiner & Colin Stewart & Filip Matějka, 2017. "Rational Inattention Dynamics: Inertia and Delay in Decision‐Making," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 85, pages 521-553, March.
    5. Fosgerau, Mogens & Jiang, Gege, 2019. "Travel time variability and rational inattention," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 1-14.
    6. Train,Kenneth E., 2009. "Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521766555.
    7. Daniel Kahneman & Amos Tversky, 2013. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Leonard C MacLean & William T Ziemba (ed.), HANDBOOK OF THE FUNDAMENTALS OF FINANCIAL DECISION MAKING Part I, chapter 6, pages 99-127, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    8. Filip Matêjka & Alisdair McKay, 2015. "Rational Inattention to Discrete Choices: A New Foundation for the Multinomial Logit Model," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 105(1), pages 272-298, January.
    9. Anas, Alex, 1983. "Discrete choice theory, information theory and the multinomial logit and gravity models," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 17(1), pages 13-23, February.
    10. Farooq, Bilal & Bierlaire, Michel & Hurtubia, Ricardo & Flötteröd, Gunnar, 2013. "Simulation based population synthesis," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 243-263.
    11. Teye, Collins & Bell, Michael G.H. & Bliemer, Michiel C.J., 2017. "Entropy maximising facility location model for port city intermodal terminals," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 1-16.
    12. Alwosheel, Ahmad & van Cranenburgh, Sander & Chorus, Caspar G., 2018. "Is your dataset big enough? Sample size requirements when using artificial neural networks for discrete choice analysis," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 28(C), pages 167-182.
    13. Sims, Christopher A., 2003. "Implications of rational inattention," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(3), pages 665-690, April.
    14. Sims, Christopher A., 2010. "Rational Inattention and Monetary Economics," Handbook of Monetary Economics, in: Benjamin M. Friedman & Michael Woodford (ed.), Handbook of Monetary Economics, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 4, pages 155-181, Elsevier.
    15. Leard, Benjamin, 2018. "Consumer inattention and the demand for vehicle fuel cost savings," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 29(C), pages 1-16.
    16. 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.
    17. Benjamin M. Friedman & Michael Woodford (ed.), 2010. "Handbook of Monetary Economics," Handbook of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, edition 1, volume 3, number 3.
    18. Daniel Ellsberg, 1961. "Risk, Ambiguity, and the Savage Axioms," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 75(4), pages 643-669.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Smeele, Nicholas V.R. & Chorus, Caspar G. & Schermer, Maartje H.N. & de Bekker-Grob, Esther W., 2023. "Towards machine learning for moral choice analysis in health economics: A literature review and research agenda," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 326(C).

    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. Mogens Fosgerau & Emerson Melo & André de Palma & Matthew Shum, 2020. "Discrete Choice And Rational Inattention: A General Equivalence Result," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 61(4), pages 1569-1589, November.
    2. Melvin Wong & Bilal Farooq, 2019. "ResLogit: A residual neural network logit model for data-driven choice modelling," Papers 1912.10058, arXiv.org, revised Feb 2021.
    3. Philippe Jehiel & Jakub Steiner, 2020. "Selective Sampling with Information-Storage Constraints [On interim rationality, belief formation and learning in decision problems with bounded memory]," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 130(630), pages 1753-1781.
    4. Bartosz Maćkowiak & Filip Matějka & Mirko Wiederholt, 2023. "Rational Inattention: A Review," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 61(1), pages 226-273, March.
    5. Chad Fulton, 2017. "Mechanics of Linear Quadratic Gaussian Rational Inattention Tracking Problems," Finance and Economics Discussion Series 2017-109, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (U.S.).
    6. Maćkowiak, Bartosz & Matějka, Filip & Wiederholt, Mirko, 2018. "Dynamic rational inattention: Analytical results," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 176(C), pages 650-692.
    7. David Walker-Jones, 2019. "Rational Inattention and Perceptual Distance," Papers 1909.00888, arXiv.org, revised Dec 2019.
    8. Vladimir Novak & Andrei Matveenko & Silvio Ravaioli, 2021. "The Status Quo and Belief Polarization of Inattentive Agents: Theory and Experiment," Working Papers 674, IGIER (Innocenzo Gasparini Institute for Economic Research), Bocconi University.
    9. Habib, Khandker Nurul, 2023. "Rational inattention in discrete choice models: Estimable specifications of RI-multinomial logit (RI-MNL) and RI-nested logit (RI-NL) models," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 172(C), pages 53-70.
    10. Angeletos, G.-M. & Lian, C., 2016. "Incomplete Information in Macroeconomics," Handbook of Macroeconomics, in: J. B. Taylor & Harald Uhlig (ed.), Handbook of Macroeconomics, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 0, pages 1065-1240, Elsevier.
    11. Lunn, Pete & Somerville, Jason J., 2015. "Surplus Identification with Non-Linear Returns," Papers WP522, Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI).
    12. Filip Matêjka & Alisdair McKay, 2015. "Rational Inattention to Discrete Choices: A New Foundation for the Multinomial Logit Model," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 105(1), pages 272-298, January.
    13. Xavier Gabaix, 2017. "Behavioral Inattention," NBER Working Papers 24096, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    14. Dräger, Lena & Lamla, Michael J. & Pfajfar, Damjan, 2016. "Are survey expectations theory-consistent? The role of central bank communication and news," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 84-111.
    15. Rico Krueger & Akshay Vij & Taha H. Rashidi, 2018. "A Dirichlet Process Mixture Model of Discrete Choice," Papers 1801.06296, arXiv.org.
    16. Levon Barseghyan & Francesca Molinari & Ted O'Donoghue & Joshua C. Teitelbaum, 2013. "The Nature of Risk Preferences: Evidence from Insurance Choices," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 103(6), pages 2499-2529, October.
    17. Mackowiak, Bartosz & Matějka, Filip & Wiederholt, Mirko, 2016. "The Rational Inattention Filter," CEPR Discussion Papers 11237, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    18. 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).
    19. Luciano Pomatto & Philipp Strack & Omer Tamuz, 2018. "The Cost of Information: The Case of Constant Marginal Costs," Papers 1812.04211, arXiv.org, revised Feb 2023.
    20. Andrew Caplin & Mark Dean, 2013. "Behavioral Implications of Rational Inattention with Shannon Entropy," NBER Working Papers 19318, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:arx:papers:1907.07036. 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: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://arxiv.org/ .

    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.