Author
Abstract
Route selection involves determining the paths between origins and destinations within a network. Understanding travellers’ route preferences allows for the calculation of traffic flow on network segments and helps in assessing facility requirements, costs, and the impact of network modifications. Traditionally, statistical models are employed for route choice modelling, but machine learning models are gaining increasing interest. However, all of these methods typically rely on a single ‘best’ model for predictions, which may be sensitive to measurement errors in the training data. Moreover, discarded models might still provide insights into route choices. Ensemble modelling combines outcomes from models using various pattern recognition methods, assumptions, or data sets to deliver improved predictions. When configured correctly, ensemble models offer greater prediction accuracy and account for uncertainties. To examine the advantages of ensemble techniques in route choice modelling, a data set from the I-35W Bridge Collapse study in 2008, and another from 2011 Travel Behavior Inventory in Minneapolis-St. Paul (The Twin Cities) are used. The analysis considered travellers’ socio-demographics and trip attributes. Traditional Multinomial Logit and Path-Size Logit models, along with machine learning methods such as Decision Tree, Random Forest, Extra Tree, AdaBoost, Support Vector Machine, and Neural Network, served as the foundation for this study. Ensemble rules were tested in both case studies, including hard voting, soft voting, ranked choice voting, weighted soft voting, and stacking. Based on the results, ensemble models using weighted soft voting outperform other ensemble rules and generally have the highest ranking in sensitivity and precision.
Suggested Citation
Haotian Wang & Emily Moylan & David Levinson, 2024.
"Ensemble Methods For Route Choice,"
Working Papers
paper-2024-14, University of Minnesota: Nexus Research Group.
Handle:
RePEc:nex:wpaper:paper-2024-14
DOI: 10.1016/j.trc.2024.104803
Download full text from publisher
More about this item
Keywords
;
;
JEL classification:
- R40 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - Transportation Economics - - - General
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:nex:wpaper:paper-2024-14. 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.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: David Levinson The email address of this maintainer does not seem to be valid anymore. Please ask David Levinson to update the entry or send us the correct address
(email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/nexmnus.html .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.