IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/transb/v166y2022icp396-418.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A random-utility-consistent machine learning method to estimate agents’ joint activity scheduling choice from a ubiquitous data set

Author

Listed:
  • Ren, Xiyuan
  • Chow, Joseph Y.J.

Abstract

We propose an agent-based mixed-logit model (AMXL) that is estimated with inverse optimization (IO) estimation, an agent-level machine learning method theoretically consistent with a utility-maximizing mixed logit model framework. The method provides joint, individual-specific, and deterministic estimation, which overcomes the limitations of discrete choice models (DCMs) given ubiquitous datasets. A case study of the CBD in Shanghai is conducted with mobile phone data of 26,149 anonymous commuters whose whole-day activity schedule on weekdays contains three sub-choices and 1,470 alternatives. AMXL is built to estimate individual tastes and predict the activity scheduling choice in different scenarios. Multinomial logit model (MNL), mixed logit model (MXL), and their dynamic forms (DMNL, DMXL) are built as benchmarks. Prediction accuracies are calculated as the percentage consistency of observed choices and predicted choices, both at individual level (to each commuter) and aggregated level (to each alternative in the choice set). The results show that empirical coefficient distributions in AMXL are neither Gumbel nor Gaussian, i.e. capturing inter-individual heterogeneities in space that are hard for DCMs to capture. The prediction accuracy of AMXL is significantly higher than the best model (DMXL) in benchmarks, improving from 8.66% to 61.68% at aggregated level and from 1.69% to 4.33% at individual level. In a comparison scenario, AMXL predicts different while reasonable change of choices compared with benchmark models. In an optimization scenario, AMXL can be directly integrated into a binary programming (BP) problem, which optimally allocates 10 blocks to send restaurant coupons to increase population consumer surplus by 19%.

Suggested Citation

  • Ren, Xiyuan & Chow, Joseph Y.J., 2022. "A random-utility-consistent machine learning method to estimate agents’ joint activity scheduling choice from a ubiquitous data set," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 166(C), pages 396-418.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:transb:v:166:y:2022:i:c:p:396-418
    DOI: 10.1016/j.trb.2022.11.005
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0191261522001862
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.trb.2022.11.005?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. Aguirregabiria, Victor & Mira, Pedro, 2010. "Dynamic discrete choice structural models: A survey," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 156(1), pages 38-67, May.
    2. Ghobadi, Kimia & Mahmoudzadeh, Houra, 2021. "Inferring linear feasible regions using inverse optimization," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 290(3), pages 829-843.
    3. Chan, Timothy C.Y. & Kaw, Neal, 2020. "Inverse optimization for the recovery of constraint parameters," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 282(2), pages 415-427.
    4. Pacheco Paneque, Meritxell & Bierlaire, Michel & Gendron, Bernard & Sharif Azadeh, Shadi, 2021. "Integrating advanced discrete choice models in mixed integer linear optimization," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 26-49.
    5. Dong, Xiaotong & Chow, Joseph Y.J. & Waller, S. Travis & Rey, David, 2022. "A chance-constrained dial-a-ride problem with utility-maximising demand and multiple pricing structures," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 158(C).
    6. Ravindra K. Ahuja & James B. Orlin, 2001. "Inverse Optimization," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 49(5), pages 771-783, October.
    7. Hasnine, Md Sami & Habib, Khandker Nurul, 2018. "What about the dynamics in daily travel mode choices? A dynamic discrete choice approach for tour-based mode choice modelling," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 70-80.
    8. Adler, Thomas & Ben-Akiva, Moshe, 1979. "A theoretical and empirical model of trip chaining behavior," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 13(3), pages 243-257, September.
    9. He, Brian Y. & Zhou, Jinkai & Ma, Ziyi & Chow, Joseph Y.J. & Ozbay, Kaan, 2020. "Evaluation of city-scale built environment policies in New York City with an emerging-mobility-accessible synthetic population," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 444-467.
    10. Cordone, Roberto & Redaelli, Francesco, 2011. "Optimizing the demand captured by a railway system with a regular timetable," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 45(2), pages 430-446, February.
    11. Wiktor Budziński & Danny Campbell & Mikołaj Czajkowski & Urška Demšar & Nick Hanley, 2018. "Using Geographically Weighted Choice Models to Account for the Spatial Heterogeneity of Preferences," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 69(3), pages 606-626, September.
    12. Richter, Laura-Lucia & Pollitt, Michael G., 2018. "Which smart electricity service contracts will consumers accept? The demand for compensation in a platform market," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 436-450.
    13. Sarrias, Mauricio, 2020. "Individual-specific posterior distributions from Mixed Logit models: Properties, limitations and diagnostic checks," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 36(C).
    14. Ljubić, Ivana & Moreno, Eduardo, 2018. "Outer approximation and submodular cuts for maximum capture facility location problems with random utilities," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 266(1), pages 46-56.
    15. Ding, Chuan & Wang, Donggen & Liu, Chao & Zhang, Yi & Yang, Jiawen, 2017. "Exploring the influence of built environment on travel mode choice considering the mediating effects of car ownership and travel distance," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 65-80.
    16. Fedor Iskhakov & John Rust & Bertel Schjerning, 2020. "Machine learning and structural econometrics: contrasts and synergies," The Econometrics Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 23(3), pages 81-124.
    17. Bowman, J. L. & Ben-Akiva, M. E., 2001. "Activity-based disaggregate travel demand model system with activity schedules," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 35(1), pages 1-28, January.
    18. Yuanying Zhao & Jacek Pawlak & John W. Polak, 2018. "Inverse discrete choice modelling: theoretical and practical considerations for imputing respondent attributes from the patterns of observed choices," Transportation Planning and Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 41(1), pages 58-79, January.
    19. Robenek, Tomáš & Azadeh, Shadi Sharif & Maknoon, Yousef & de Lapparent, Matthieu & Bierlaire, Michel, 2018. "Train timetable design under elastic passenger demand," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 19-38.
    20. Susan Jia Xu & Mehdi Nourinejad & Xuebo Lai & Joseph Y. J. Chow, 2018. "Network Learning via Multiagent Inverse Transportation Problems," Service Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(6), pages 1347-1364, December.
    21. David Charypar & Kai Nagel, 2005. "Generating complete all-day activity plans with genetic algorithms," Transportation, Springer, vol. 32(4), pages 369-397, July.
    22. Hess, Stephane & Hensher, David A., 2010. "Using conditioning on observed choices to retrieve individual-specific attribute processing strategies," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 44(6), pages 781-790, July.
    23. Ettema, Dick & Bastin, Fabian & Polak, John & Ashiru, Olu, 2007. "Modelling the joint choice of activity timing and duration," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 41(9), pages 827-841, November.
    24. 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.
    25. Lizana, Pedro & Ortúzar, Juan de Dios & Arellana, Julián & Rizzi, Luis I., 2021. "Forecasting with a joint mode/time-of-day choice model based on combined RP and SC data," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 150(C), pages 302-316.
    26. Lemp, Jason D. & Kockelman, Kara M., 2012. "Strategic sampling for large choice sets in estimation and application," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 46(3), pages 602-613.
    27. Hong, Sung-Pil & Kim, Kyung min & Byeon, Geunyeong & Min, Yun-Hong, 2017. "A method to directly derive taste heterogeneity of travellers’ route choice in public transport from observed routes," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 41-52.
    28. Krueger, Rico & Bierlaire, Michel & Daziano, Ricardo A. & Rashidi, Taha H. & Bansal, Prateek, 2021. "Evaluating the predictive abilities of mixed logit models with unobserved inter- and intra-individual heterogeneity," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 41(C).
    29. Chow, Joseph Y.J. & Recker, Will W., 2012. "Inverse optimization with endogenous arrival time constraints to calibrate the household activity pattern problem," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 46(3), pages 463-479.
    30. Abdul Rawoof Pinjari & Chandra R. Bhat, 2011. "Activity-based Travel Demand Analysis," Chapters, in: André de Palma & Robin Lindsey & Emile Quinet & Roger Vickerman (ed.), A Handbook of Transport Economics, chapter 10, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    31. Becker, Felix & Danaf, Mazen & Song, Xiang & Atasoy, Bilge & Ben-Akiva, Moshe, 2018. "Bayesian estimator for Logit Mixtures with inter- and intra-consumer heterogeneity," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 117(PA), pages 1-17.
    32. François Gilbert & Patrice Marcotte & Gilles Savard, 2015. "A Numerical Study of the Logit Network Pricing Problem," Transportation Science, INFORMS, vol. 49(3), pages 706-719, August.
    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. Xiyuan Ren & Joseph Y. J. Chow & Venktesh Pandey & Linfei Yuan, 2024. "Integrating an agent-based behavioral model in microtransit forecasting and revenue management," Papers 2408.12577, arXiv.org.
    2. Xiyuan Ren & Joseph Y. J. Chow & Prateek Bansal, 2023. "Estimating a k-modal nonparametric mixed logit model with market-level data," Papers 2309.13159, arXiv.org, revised Aug 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. Xiyuan Ren & Joseph Y. J. Chow & Prateek Bansal, 2023. "Estimating a k-modal nonparametric mixed logit model with market-level data," Papers 2309.13159, arXiv.org, revised Aug 2024.
    2. Pacheco Paneque, Meritxell & Bierlaire, Michel & Gendron, Bernard & Sharif Azadeh, Shadi, 2021. "Integrating advanced discrete choice models in mixed integer linear optimization," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 26-49.
    3. Song, Yuchen & Li, Dawei & Liu, Dongjie & Cao, Qi & Chen, Junlan & Ren, Gang & Tang, Xiaoyong, 2022. "Modeling activity-travel behavior under a dynamic discrete choice framework with unobserved heterogeneity," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    4. Xu, Zhiheng & Kang, Jee Eun & Chen, Roger, 2018. "A random utility based estimation framework for the household activity pattern problem," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 114(PB), pages 321-337.
    5. Pougala, Janody & Hillel, Tim & Bierlaire, Michel, 2022. "Capturing trade-offs between daily scheduling choices," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 43(C).
    6. Badiola, Nicolás & Raveau, Sebastián & Galilea, Patricia, 2019. "Modelling preferences towards activities and their effect on departure time choices," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 39-51.
    7. Usman Ahmed & Ana Tsui Moreno & Rolf Moeckel, 2021. "Microscopic activity sequence generation: a multiple correspondence analysis to explain travel behavior based on socio-demographic person attributes," Transportation, Springer, vol. 48(3), pages 1481-1502, June.
    8. Sarrias, Mauricio, 2020. "Individual-specific posterior distributions from Mixed Logit models: Properties, limitations and diagnostic checks," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 36(C).
    9. Usman Ahmed & Ana Tsui Moreno & Rolf Moeckel, 0. "Microscopic activity sequence generation: a multiple correspondence analysis to explain travel behavior based on socio-demographic person attributes," Transportation, Springer, vol. 0, pages 1-22.
    10. Merve Bodur & Timothy C. Y. Chan & Ian Yihang Zhu, 2022. "Inverse Mixed Integer Optimization: Polyhedral Insights and Trust Region Methods," INFORMS Journal on Computing, INFORMS, vol. 34(3), pages 1471-1488, May.
    11. Ghobadi, Kimia & Mahmoudzadeh, Houra, 2021. "Inferring linear feasible regions using inverse optimization," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 290(3), pages 829-843.
    12. Susan Jia Xu & Mehdi Nourinejad & Xuebo Lai & Joseph Y. J. Chow, 2018. "Network Learning via Multiagent Inverse Transportation Problems," Service Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(6), pages 1347-1364, December.
    13. Zhao, Yuanying & Pawlak, Jacek & Sivakumar, Aruna, 2022. "Theory for socio-demographic enrichment performance using the inverse discrete choice modelling approach," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 155(C), pages 101-134.
    14. Naqavi, Fatemeh & Sundberg, Marcus & Västberg, Oskar Blom & Karlström, Anders & Hugosson, Muriel Beser, 2023. "Mobility constraints and accessibility to work: Application to Stockholm," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 175(C).
    15. Zhang, Yongxiang & Peng, Qiyuan & Yao, Yu & Zhang, Xin & Zhou, Xuesong, 2019. "Solving cyclic train timetabling problem through model reformulation: Extended time-space network construct and Alternating Direction Method of Multipliers methods," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 344-379.
    16. He, Brian Yueshuai & Zhou, Jinkai & Ma, Ziyi & Wang, Ding & Sha, Di & Lee, Mina & Chow, Joseph Y.J. & Ozbay, Kaan, 2021. "A validated multi-agent simulation test bed to evaluate congestion pricing policies on population segments by time-of-day in New York City," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 145-161.
    17. Hartleb, Johann & Schmidt, Marie, 2022. "Railway timetabling with integrated passenger distribution," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 298(3), pages 953-966.
    18. He, Brian Y. & Zhou, Jinkai & Ma, Ziyi & Chow, Joseph Y.J. & Ozbay, Kaan, 2020. "Evaluation of city-scale built environment policies in New York City with an emerging-mobility-accessible synthetic population," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 444-467.
    19. Lauren Chenarides & Carola Grebitus & Jayson L Lusk & Iryna Printezis, 2022. "A calibrated choice experiment method," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 49(5), pages 971-1004.
    20. Maya Abou-Zeid & Moshe Ben-Akiva, 2012. "Well-being and activity-based models," Transportation, Springer, vol. 39(6), pages 1189-1207, November.

    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:166:y:2022:i:c:p:396-418. 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.