Lujin Zhao, Z. Szajnfarber, David A. Broniatowski, J. Helveston
{"title":"Using conjoint analysis to incorporate heterogeneous preferences into multimodal transit trip simulations","authors":"Lujin Zhao, Z. Szajnfarber, David A. Broniatowski, J. Helveston","doi":"10.1002/sys.21670","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Urban transportation systems involve thousands of individuals making choices between routes with multiple modes and transfers. For transportation system simulations to produce realistic results, modelers need to incorporate these users and their choices. Choice‐based conjoint surveys provide an attractive solution for obtaining flexible utility models that can be used to predict choices for a wide variety of trips. In this study, we demonstrate an example using conjoint survey data of commuter mode choice in the Washington, D.C. metro area (N = 1651). We sample commuters who primarily drive and those that take transit. We examine preferences for different types of multimodal trips, including those with intramodal and intermodel transfers. We find that trips involving a bus transfer are the least preferred while both drivers and transit users both value metro similarly to driving. We also find that walking during transit trips is an important barrier, with the travel time penalty for walking being 60% higher than that of time in a vehicle. Our findings highlight the significance of accounting for differences in modal transfer types in transportation system simulations. Reducing arrival time uncertainty was not a significant factor in commuter mode choice, and commuters' value of time was similar across all vehicle types, suggesting that increasing the relative speed of transit modes may only have a marginal effect on commuter substitution away from personal vehicles.","PeriodicalId":54439,"journal":{"name":"Systems Engineering","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Systems Engineering","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/sys.21670","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, INDUSTRIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Urban transportation systems involve thousands of individuals making choices between routes with multiple modes and transfers. For transportation system simulations to produce realistic results, modelers need to incorporate these users and their choices. Choice‐based conjoint surveys provide an attractive solution for obtaining flexible utility models that can be used to predict choices for a wide variety of trips. In this study, we demonstrate an example using conjoint survey data of commuter mode choice in the Washington, D.C. metro area (N = 1651). We sample commuters who primarily drive and those that take transit. We examine preferences for different types of multimodal trips, including those with intramodal and intermodel transfers. We find that trips involving a bus transfer are the least preferred while both drivers and transit users both value metro similarly to driving. We also find that walking during transit trips is an important barrier, with the travel time penalty for walking being 60% higher than that of time in a vehicle. Our findings highlight the significance of accounting for differences in modal transfer types in transportation system simulations. Reducing arrival time uncertainty was not a significant factor in commuter mode choice, and commuters' value of time was similar across all vehicle types, suggesting that increasing the relative speed of transit modes may only have a marginal effect on commuter substitution away from personal vehicles.
期刊介绍:
Systems Engineering is a discipline whose responsibility it is to create and operate technologically enabled systems that satisfy stakeholder needs throughout their life cycle. Systems engineers reduce ambiguity by clearly defining stakeholder needs and customer requirements, they focus creativity by developing a system’s architecture and design and they manage the system’s complexity over time. Considerations taken into account by systems engineers include, among others, quality, cost and schedule, risk and opportunity under uncertainty, manufacturing and realization, performance and safety during operations, training and support, as well as disposal and recycling at the end of life. The journal welcomes original submissions in the field of Systems Engineering as defined above, but also encourages contributions that take an even broader perspective including the design and operation of systems-of-systems, the application of Systems Engineering to enterprises and complex socio-technical systems, the identification, selection and development of systems engineers as well as the evolution of systems and systems-of-systems over their entire lifecycle.
Systems Engineering integrates all the disciplines and specialty groups into a coordinated team effort forming a structured development process that proceeds from concept to realization to operation. Increasingly important topics in Systems Engineering include the role of executable languages and models of systems, the concurrent use of physical and virtual prototyping, as well as the deployment of agile processes. Systems Engineering considers both the business and the technical needs of all stakeholders with the goal of providing a quality product that meets the user needs. Systems Engineering may be applied not only to products and services in the private sector but also to public infrastructures and socio-technical systems whose precise boundaries are often challenging to define.