IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/transb/v158y2022icp273-294.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A variational autoencoder approach for choice set generation and implicit perception of alternatives in choice modeling

Author

Listed:
  • Yao, Rui
  • Bekhor, Shlomo

Abstract

Choice set generation is a challenging task, since the consideration set is generally unknown to the modelers, and the full choice set could be too large to be enumerated. The proposed variational autoencoder approach (VAE) is motivated by the idea that the chosen alternatives must belong to the consideration set. The proposed VAE method explicitly considers maximizing the likelihood of including the chosen alternatives in the choice set and inferring the underlying generation process. This paper derives the generalized extreme value (GEV) model with implicit availability/perception (IAP) of alternatives, for bridging the VAE with choice modeling. Specifically, the cross-nested logit (CNL) model with IAP is derived as an example of IAP-GEV models. The IAP approach assumes each alternative is associated with an implicit degree of availability/perception (likelihood in the context of VAE) to be included in the choice set. The VAE approach for route choice set generation is illustrated in a toy network. Simulation experiments show that the proposed method could reproduce the pre-defined true values. We further exemplify the VAE approach using a real dataset. The IAP-CNL model estimated has the best performance in terms of goodness-of-fit and prediction performance, compared to multinomial logit models and conventional choice set generation methods.

Suggested Citation

  • Yao, Rui & Bekhor, Shlomo, 2022. "A variational autoencoder approach for choice set generation and implicit perception of alternatives in choice modeling," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 158(C), pages 273-294.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:transb:v:158:y:2022:i:c:p:273-294
    DOI: 10.1016/j.trb.2022.02.015
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S019126152200042X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.trb.2022.02.015?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. Nassir, Neema & Hickman, Mark & Ma, Zhen-Liang, 2019. "A strategy-based recursive path choice model for public transit smart card data," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 528-548.
    2. Frejinger, E. & Bierlaire, M. & Ben-Akiva, M., 2009. "Sampling of alternatives for route choice modeling," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 43(10), pages 984-994, December.
    3. S. Van Cranenburgh & S. Wang & A. Vij & F. Pereira & J. Walker, 2021. "Choice modelling in the age of machine learning -- discussion paper," Papers 2101.11948, arXiv.org, revised Nov 2021.
    4. Michel Bierlaire, 2006. "A theoretical analysis of the cross-nested logit model," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 144(1), pages 287-300, April.
    5. Wang, Shenhao & Mo, Baichuan & Zhao, Jinhua, 2021. "Theory-based residual neural networks: A synergy of discrete choice models and deep neural networks," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 333-358.
    6. Marisol Castro & Francisco Martínez & Marcela Munizaga, 2013. "Estimation of a constrained multinomial logit model," Transportation, Springer, vol. 40(3), pages 563-581, May.
    7. Crawford, Gregory S. & Griffith, Rachel & Iaria, Alessandro, 2021. "A survey of preference estimation with unobserved choice set heterogeneity," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 222(1), pages 4-43.
    8. Shlomo Bekhor & Moshe Ben-Akiva & M. Ramming, 2006. "Evaluation of choice set generation algorithms for route choice models," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 144(1), pages 235-247, April.
    9. Lai, Xinjun & Bierlaire, Michel, 2015. "Specification of the cross-nested logit model with sampling of alternatives for route choice models," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 220-234.
    10. Flötteröd, Gunnar & Bierlaire, Michel, 2013. "Metropolis–Hastings sampling of paths," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 53-66.
    11. Mai, Tien & Fosgerau, Mogens & Frejinger, Emma, 2015. "A nested recursive logit model for route choice analysis," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 100-112.
    12. Sifringer, Brian & Lurkin, Virginie & Alahi, Alexandre, 2020. "Enhancing discrete choice models with representation learning," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 236-261.
    13. Fosgerau, Mogens & Frejinger, Emma & Karlstrom, Anders, 2013. "A link based network route choice model with unrestricted choice set," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 70-80.
    14. Cascetta, Ennio & Russo, Francesco & Viola, Francesco A. & Vitetta, Antonino, 2002. "A model of route perception in urban road networks," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 36(7), pages 577-592, August.
    15. Otto Nielsen & Rasmus Frederiksen, 2006. "Optimisation of timetable-based, stochastic transit assignment models based on MSA," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 144(1), pages 263-285, April.
    16. Swait, Joffre & Ben-Akiva, Moshe, 1987. "Incorporating random constraints in discrete models of choice set generation," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 21(2), pages 91-102, April.
    17. Guevara, C. Angelo & Ben-Akiva, Moshe E., 2013. "Sampling of alternatives in Logit Mixture models," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 185-198.
    18. Guevara, C. Angelo & Ben-Akiva, Moshe E., 2013. "Sampling of alternatives in Multivariate Extreme Value (MEV) models," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 31-52.
    19. Yai, Tetsuo & Iwakura, Seiji & Morichi, Shigeru, 1997. "Multinomial probit with structured covariance for route choice behavior," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 31(3), pages 195-207, June.
    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. Méndez-Vogel, Gonzalo & Marianov, Vladimir & Lüer-Villagra, Armin & Eiselt, H.A., 2023. "Store location with multipurpose shopping trips and a new random utility customers’ choice model," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 305(2), pages 708-721.
    2. Qingyi Wang & Shenhao Wang & Yunhan Zheng & Hongzhou Lin & Xiaohu Zhang & Jinhua Zhao & Joan Walker, 2023. "Deep hybrid model with satellite imagery: how to combine demand modeling and computer vision for behavior analysis?," Papers 2303.04204, arXiv.org, revised Feb 2024.

    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. Hamzeh Alizadeh & Bilal Farooq & Catherine Morency & Nicolas Saunier, 2018. "On the role of bridges as anchor points in route choice modeling," Transportation, Springer, vol. 45(5), pages 1181-1206, September.
    2. Kazagli, Evanthia & Bierlaire, Michel & Flötteröd, Gunnar, 2016. "Revisiting the route choice problem: A modeling framework based on mental representations," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 19(C), pages 1-23.
    3. Evanthia Kazagli & Michel Bierlaire & Matthieu de Lapparent, 2020. "Operational route choice methodologies for practical applications," Transportation, Springer, vol. 47(1), pages 43-74, February.
    4. Lai, Xinjun & Bierlaire, Michel, 2015. "Specification of the cross-nested logit model with sampling of alternatives for route choice models," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 220-234.
    5. Mai, Tien & Yu, Xinlian & Gao, Song & Frejinger, Emma, 2021. "Routing policy choice prediction in a stochastic network: Recursive model and solution algorithm," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 42-58.
    6. Ding-Mastera, Jing & Gao, Song & Jenelius, Erik & Rahmani, Mahmood & Ben-Akiva, Moshe, 2019. "A latent-class adaptive routing choice model in stochastic time-dependent networks," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 1-17.
    7. Blom Västberg, Oskar & Karlström, Anders & Jonsson, Daniel & Sundberg, Marcus, 2016. "Including time in a travel demand model using dynamic discrete choice," MPRA Paper 75336, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 11 Nov 2016.
    8. Leite Mariante, Gabriel & Ma, Tai-Yu & Van Acker, Véronique, 2018. "Modeling discretionary activity location choice using detour factors and sampling of alternatives for mixed logit models," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 151-165.
    9. Mai, Tien & Frejinger, Emma & Fosgerau, Mogens & Bastin, Fabian, 2017. "A dynamic programming approach for quickly estimating large network-based MEV models," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 179-197.
    10. Oyama, Yuki & Hara, Yusuke & Akamatsu, Takashi, 2022. "Markovian traffic equilibrium assignment based on network generalized extreme value model," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 155(C), pages 135-159.
    11. Mai, Tien & Fosgerau, Mogens & Frejinger, Emma, 2015. "A nested recursive logit model for route choice analysis," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 100-112.
    12. Selin Damla Ahipaşaoğlu & Uğur Arıkan & Karthik Natarajan, 2019. "Distributionally Robust Markovian Traffic Equilibrium," Transportation Science, INFORMS, vol. 53(6), pages 1546-1562, November.
    13. Cortés, Cristián E. & Donoso, Pedro & Gutiérrez, Leonel & Herl, Daniel & Muñoz, Diego, 2023. "A recursive stochastic transit equilibrium model estimated using passive data from Santiago, Chile," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 174(C).
    14. 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).
    15. Mai, Tien & Bastin, Fabian & Frejinger, Emma, 2017. "On the similarities between random regret minimization and mother logit: The case of recursive route choice models," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 23(C), pages 21-33.
    16. Meyer de Freitas, Lucas & Becker, Henrik & Zimmermann, Maëlle & Axhausen, Kay W., 2019. "Modelling intermodal travel in Switzerland: A recursive logit approach," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 200-213.
    17. Fosgerau, Mogens & Frejinger, Emma & Karlstrom, Anders, 2013. "A link based network route choice model with unrestricted choice set," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 70-80.
    18. Frejinger, E. & Bierlaire, M. & Ben-Akiva, M., 2009. "Sampling of alternatives for route choice modeling," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 43(10), pages 984-994, December.
    19. Li, Dawei & Feng, Siqi & Song, Yuchen & Lai, Xinjun & Bekhor, Shlomo, 2023. "Asymmetric closed-form route choice models: Formulations and comparative applications," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 171(C).
    20. Oskar Blom Västberg & Anders Karlström & Daniel Jonsson & Marcus Sundberg, 2020. "A Dynamic Discrete Choice Activity-Based Travel Demand Model," Transportation Science, INFORMS, vol. 54(1), pages 21-41, January.

    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:transb:v:158:y:2022:i:c:p:273-294. 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/548/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.