IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/transb/v183y2024ics0191261524000717.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A new flexible and partially monotonic discrete choice model

Author

Listed:
  • Kim, Eui-Jin
  • Bansal, Prateek

Abstract

The poor predictability and the misspecification arising from hand-crafted utility functions are common issues in theory-driven discrete choice models (DCMs). Data-driven DCMs improve predictability through flexible utility specifications, but they do not address the misspecification issue and provide untrustworthy behavioral interpretations (e.g., biased willingness to pay estimates). Improving interpretability at the minimum loss of flexibility/predictability is the main challenge in the data-driven DCM. To this end, this study proposes a flexible and partially monotonic DCM by specifying the systematic utility using the Lattice networks (i.e., DCM-LN). DCM-LN ensures the monotonicity of the utility function relative to the selected attributes while learning attribute-specific non-linear effects through piecewise linear functions and interaction effects using multilinear interpolations in a data-driven manner. Partial monotonicity could be viewed as domain-knowledge-based regularization to prevent overfitting, consequently avoiding incorrect signs of the attribute effects. The light architecture and an automated process to write monotonicity constraints make DCM-LN scalable and translatable to practice. The proposed DCM-LN is benchmarked against deep neural network-based DCM (i.e., DCM-DNN) and a DCM with a hand-crafted utility in a simulation study. While DCM-DNN marginally outperforms DCM-LN in predictability, DCM-LN highly outperforms all considered models in interpretability, i.e., recovering willingness to pay at individual and population levels. The empirical study verifies the balanced interpretability and predictability of DCM-LN. With superior interpretability and high predictability, DCM-LN lays out new pathways to harmonize the theory-driven and data-driven paradigms.

Suggested Citation

  • Kim, Eui-Jin & Bansal, Prateek, 2024. "A new flexible and partially monotonic discrete choice model," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 183(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:transb:v:183:y:2024:i:c:s0191261524000717
    DOI: 10.1016/j.trb.2024.102947
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0191261524000717
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.trb.2024.102947?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. Ji, Shujuan & Wang, Xin & Lyu, Tao & Liu, Xiaojie & Wang, Yuanqing & Heinen, Eva & Sun, Zhenwei, 2022. "Understanding cycling distance according to the prediction of the XGBoost and the interpretation of SHAP: A non-linear and interaction effect analysis," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 103(C).
    2. Brownstone, David & Ghosh, Arindam & Kazimi, Camilla & Van Amelsfort, Dirk, 2002. "Drivers' Willingness-to-Pay to Reduce Travel Time: Evidence from the San Diego I-15 Congestion Pricing Project," University of California Transportation Center, Working Papers qt8q7331mz, University of California Transportation Center.
    3. Kim, Eui-Jin & Kim, Youngseo & Jang, Sunghoon & Kim, Dong-Kyu, 2021. "Tourists’ preference on the combination of travel modes under Mobility-as-a-Service environment," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 150(C), pages 236-255.
    4. Brownstone, David & Ghosh, Arindam & Golob, Thomas F & Kazimi, Camilla & Van Amelsfort, Dirk, 2002. "Drivers' Willingness-to-Pay to Reduce Travel Time: Evidence from the San Diego I-15 Congestion Pricing Project," University of California Transportation Center, Working Papers qt3mx1d1k4, University of California Transportation Center.
    5. Andrew Daly & Nobuhiro Sanko & Mark Wardman, 2017. "Cost and time damping: evidence from aggregate rail direct demand models," Transportation, Springer, vol. 44(6), pages 1499-1517, November.
    6. Bansal, Prateek & Kumar, Rajeev Ranjan & Raj, Alok & Dubey, Subodh & Graham, Daniel J., 2021. "Willingness to pay and attitudinal preferences of Indian consumers for electric vehicles," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 100(C).
    7. Jeppe Rich & Stefan L. Mabit, 2016. "Cost damping and functional form in transport models," Transportation, Springer, vol. 43(5), pages 889-912, September.
    8. Batarce, Marco & Muñoz, Juan Carlos & Ortúzar, Juan de Dios, 2016. "Valuing crowding in public transport: Implications for cost-benefit analysis," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 358-378.
    9. Prateek Bansal & Daniel Hörcher & Daniel J. Graham, 2022. "A dynamic choice model to estimate the user cost of crowding with large‐scale transit data," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 185(2), pages 615-639, April.
    10. Daisuke Fukuda & Tetsuo Yai, 2010. "Semiparametric specification of the utility function in a travel mode choice model," Transportation, Springer, vol. 37(2), pages 221-238, March.
    11. Brownstone, David & Ghosh, Arindam & Golob, Thomas F. & Kazimi, Camilla & Van Amelsfort, Dirk, 2003. "Drivers' willingness-to-pay to reduce travel time: evidence from the San Diego I-15 congestion pricing project," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 37(4), pages 373-387, May.
    12. Ho, Chinh Q. & Mulley, Corinne & Hensher, David A., 2020. "Public preferences for mobility as a service: Insights from stated preference surveys," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 70-90.
    13. Train,Kenneth E., 2009. "Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521766555, July.
    14. 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.
    15. Brathwaite, Timothy & Walker, Joan L., 2018. "Causal inference in travel demand modeling (and the lack thereof)," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 26(C), pages 1-18.
    16. Arkoudi, Ioanna & Krueger, Rico & Azevedo, Carlos Lima & Pereira, Francisco C., 2023. "Combining discrete choice models and neural networks through embeddings: Formulation, interpretability and performance," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 175(C).
    17. Hernandez, Jose Ignacio & van Cranenburgh, Sander & Chorus, Caspar & Mouter, Niek, 2023. "Data-driven assisted model specification for complex choice experiments data: Association rules learning and random forests for Participatory Value Evaluation experiments," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 46(C).
    18. Eric Miller, 2023. "The current state of activity-based travel demand modelling and some possible next steps," Transport Reviews, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 43(4), pages 565-570, July.
    19. Bansal, Prateek & Daziano, Ricardo A. & Sunder, Naveen, 2019. "Arriving at a decision: A semi-parametric approach to institutional birth choice in India," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 31(C), pages 86-103.
    20. 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.
    21. Swait, Joffre, 2001. "A non-compensatory choice model incorporating attribute cutoffs," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 35(10), pages 903-928, November.
    22. Han, Yafei & Pereira, Francisco Camara & Ben-Akiva, Moshe & Zegras, Christopher, 2022. "A neural-embedded discrete choice model: Learning taste representation with strengthened interpretability," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 163(C), pages 166-186.
    23. Prateek Bansal & Rajeev Ranjan Kumar & Alok Raj & Subodh Dubey & Daniel J. Graham, 2021. "Willingness to Pay and Attitudinal Preferences of Indian Consumers for Electric Vehicles," Papers 2101.08008, arXiv.org, revised May 2021.
    24. Ortelli, Nicola & Hillel, Tim & Pereira, Francisco C. & de Lapparent, Matthieu & Bierlaire, Michel, 2021. "Assisted specification of discrete choice models," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 39(C).
    25. 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.
    26. Dubey, Subodh & Cats, Oded & Hoogendoorn, Serge & Bansal, Prateek, 2022. "A multinomial probit model with Choquet integral and attribute cut-offs," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 158(C), pages 140-163.
    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. Dubey, Subodh & Cats, Oded & Hoogendoorn, Serge & Bansal, Prateek, 2022. "A multinomial probit model with Choquet integral and attribute cut-offs," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 158(C), pages 140-163.
    2. Espino, Raquel & de Dios Ortúzar, Juan & Román, Concepción, 2007. "Understanding suburban travel demand: Flexible modelling with revealed and stated choice data," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 41(10), pages 899-912, December.
    3. Eboli, Laura & Mazzulla, G., 2008. "Willingness-to-pay of public transport users for improvement in service quality," European Transport \ Trasporti Europei, ISTIEE, Institute for the Study of Transport within the European Economic Integration, issue 38, pages 107-118.
    4. Lin, Shihan & Spissu, Erika & Cirillo, Cinzia, 2024. "An analysis of travel behavior and willingness to pay on Express Lanes before and during the COVID-19 pandemic," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 182(C).
    5. Milad Haghani & Michiel C. J. Bliemer & John M. Rose & Harmen Oppewal & Emily Lancsar, 2021. "Hypothetical bias in stated choice experiments: Part I. Integrative synthesis of empirical evidence and conceptualisation of external validity," Papers 2102.02940, arXiv.org.
    6. John Rose & David Hensher, 2014. "Tollroads are only part of the overall trip: the error of our ways in past willingness to pay studies," Transportation, Springer, vol. 41(4), pages 819-837, July.
    7. Niousha Bagheri & Milad Ghasri & Michael Barlow, 2025. "RUM-NN: A Neural Network Model Compatible with Random Utility Maximisation for Discrete Choice Setups," Papers 2501.05221, arXiv.org.
    8. 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).
    9. Jou, Rong-Chang & Yeh, Yi-Chun, 2013. "Freeway passenger car drivers' travel choice behaviour in a distance-based toll system," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 27(C), pages 11-19.
    10. Steimetz, Seiji S.C. & Brownstone, David, 2005. "Estimating commuters' "value of time" with noisy data: a multiple imputation approach," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 39(10), pages 865-889, December.
    11. Seiji S. C. Steimetz, 2009. "White‐Knuckle Externalities," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 47(2), pages 304-316, April.
    12. Janson, Michael & Levinson, David, 2014. "HOT or not," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 21-32.
    13. 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.
    14. Papakonstantinou, Ilia & Lee, Jinwoo & Madanat, Samer Michel, 2019. "Game theoretic approaches for highway infrastructure protection against sea level rise: Co-opetition among multiple players," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 21-37.
    15. Ma, Jiaxin & Chen, Xumei & Zhang, Xiaomei & Zhang, Yixin & Yu, Lei, 2024. "Exploring the willingness to pay for high-occupancy toll lanes under conditions of low familiarity," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 154(C), pages 142-156.
    16. MELIS, Lissa & SÖRENSEN, Kenneth, 2021. "The real-time on-demand bus routing problem: What is the cost of dynamic requests?," Working Papers 2021003, University of Antwerp, Faculty of Business and Economics.
    17. Markose, Sheri & Alentorn, Amadeo & Koesrindartoto, Deddy & Allen, Peter & Blythe, Phil & Grosso, Sergio, 2007. "A smart market for passenger road transport (SMPRT) congestion: An application of computational mechanism design," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 31(6), pages 2001-2032, June.
    18. Barahimi, Amir Hossein & Eydi, Alireza & Aghaie, Abdolah, 2021. "Multi-modal urban transit network design considering reliability: multi-objective bi-level optimization," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 216(C).
    19. Thomas M. Fullerton Jr. & Angel L. Molina Jr & Adam G. Walke, 2013. "Tolls, exchange rates, and northbound international bridge traffic from Mexico," Regional Science Policy & Practice, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 5(3), pages 305-321, August.
    20. Jia, Wenjian & Jiang, Zhiqiu & Wang, Qian & Xu, Bin & Xiao, Mei, 2023. "Preferences for zero-emission vehicle attributes: Comparing early adopters with mainstream consumers in California," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 135(C), pages 21-32.

    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:183:y:2024:i:c:s0191261524000717. 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.