Adrian Meister , Zheng Liang , Matteo Felder , Kay W. Axhausen
{"title":"Comparative study of route choice models for cyclists","authors":"Adrian Meister , Zheng Liang , Matteo Felder , Kay W. Axhausen","doi":"10.1016/j.jcmr.2024.100018","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>This paper presents a comparison of different route choice models for cyclists. The data includes approx. 3,700 cycling trajectories. The network is derived based on the Open-Street-Map that contains street-level attribute information. We estimate two path-based and one link-based models. We present descriptive statistics, model results, resulting indicators, and compare different validation approaches. The results reveal important differences across the models, especially in context of applications and policy-making.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":100771,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Cycling and Micromobility Research","volume":"2 ","pages":"Article 100018"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2950105924000093/pdfft?md5=d44160866fe2f6d0f2ebc89dfb44d47f&pid=1-s2.0-S2950105924000093-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Cycling and Micromobility Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2950105924000093","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
This paper presents a comparison of different route choice models for cyclists. The data includes approx. 3,700 cycling trajectories. The network is derived based on the Open-Street-Map that contains street-level attribute information. We estimate two path-based and one link-based models. We present descriptive statistics, model results, resulting indicators, and compare different validation approaches. The results reveal important differences across the models, especially in context of applications and policy-making.