Subscribe to the gold package and get unlimited access to Shamra Academy
Register a new userModeling Stated Preference for Mobility-on-Demand Transit: A Comparison of Machine Learning and Logit Models
194
0
0.0
(
0
)
Added by
Xilei Zhao
Publication date
2018
fields
Informatics Engineering
and research's language is
English
Ask ChatGPT about the research
No Arabic abstract
Logit models are usually applied when studying individual travel behavior, i.e., to predict travel mode choice and to gain behavioral insights on traveler preferences. Recently, some studies have applied machine learning to model travel mode choice and reported higher out-of-sample predictive accuracy than traditional logit models (e.g., multinomial logit). However, little research focuses on comparing the interpretability of machine learning with logit models. In other words, how to draw behavioral insights from the high-performance black-box machine-learning models remains largely unsolved in the field of travel behavior modeling. This paper aims at providing a comprehensive comparison between the two approaches by examining the key similarities and differences in model development, evaluation, and behavioral interpretation between logit and machine-learning models for travel mode choice modeling. To complement the theoretical discussions, the paper also empirically evaluates the two approaches on the stated-preference survey data for a new type of transit system integrating high-frequency fixed-route services and ridesourcing. The results show that machine learning can produce significantly higher predictive accuracy than logit models. Moreover, machine learning and logit models largely agree on many aspects of behavioral interpretations. In addition, machine learning can automatically capture the nonlinear relationship between the input features and choice outcomes. The paper concludes that there is great potential in merging ideas from machine learning and conventional statistical methods to develop refined models for travel behavior research and suggests some new research directions.
rate research
Read More
Recent years have witnessed an increased focus on interpretability and the use of machine learning to inform policy analysis and decision making. This paper applies machine learning to examine travel behavior and, in particular, on modeling changes in travel modes when individuals are presented with a novel (on-demand) mobility option. It addresses the following question: Can machine learning be applied to model individual taste heterogeneity (preference heterogeneity for travel modes and response heterogeneity to travel attributes) in travel mode choice? This paper first develops a high-accuracy classifier to predict mode-switching behavior under a hypothetical Mobility-on-Demand Transit system (i.e., stated-preference data), which represents the case study underlying this research. We show that this classifier naturally captures individual heterogeneity available in the data. Moreover, the paper derives insights on heterogeneous switching behaviors through the generation of marginal effects and elasticities by current travel mode, partial dependence plots, and individual conditional expectation plots. The paper also proposes two new model-agnostic interpretation tools for machine learning, i.e., conditional partial dependence plots and conditional individual partial dependence plots, specifically designed to examine response heterogeneity. The results on the case study show that the machine-learning classifier, together with model-agnostic interpretation tools, provides valuable insights on travel mode switching behavior for different individuals and population segments. For example, the existing drivers are more sensitive to additional pickups than people using other travel modes, and current transit users are generally willing to share rides but reluctant to take any additional transfers.
Concepts of Mobility-on-Demand (MOD) and Mobility as a Service (MaaS), which feature the integration of various shared-use mobility options, have gained widespread popularity in recent years. While these concepts promise great benefits to travelers, their heavy reliance on technology raises equity concerns as socially disadvantaged population groups can be left out in an era of on-demand mobility. This paper investigates the potential uptake of MOD transit services (integrated fixed-route and on-demand services) among travelers living in low-income communities. Specially, we analyze peoples latent attitude towards three shared-use mobility services, including ride-hailing services, fixed-route transit, and MOD transit. We conduct a latent class cluster analysis of 825 survey respondents sampled from low-income neighborhoods in Detroit and Ypsilanti, Michigan. We identified three latent segments: shared-mode enthusiast, shared-mode opponent, and fixed-route transit loyalist. People from the shared-mode enthusiast segment often use ride-hailing services and live in areas with poor transit access, and they are likely to be the early adopters of MOD transit services. The shared-mode opponent segment mainly includes vehicle owners who lack interests in shared mobility options. The fixed-route transit loyalist segment includes a considerable share of low-income individuals who face technological barriers to use the MOD transit. We also find that males, college graduates, car owners, people with a mobile data plan, and people living in poor-transit-access areas have a higher level of preferences for MOD transit services. We conclude with policy recommendations for developing more accessible and equitable MOD transit services.
Understanding and removing bias from the decisions made by machine learning models is essential to avoid discrimination against unprivileged groups. Despite recent progress in algorithmic fairness, there is still no clear answer as to which bias-mitigation approaches are most effective. Evaluation strategies are typically use-case specific, rely on data with unclear bias, and employ a fixed policy to convert model outputs to decision outcomes. To address these problems, we performed a systematic comparison of a number of popular fairness algorithms applicable to supervised classification. Our study is the most comprehensive of its kind. It utilizes three real and four synthetic datasets, and two different ways of converting model outputs to decisions. It considers fairness, predictive-performance, calibration quality, and speed of 28 different modelling pipelines, corresponding to both fairness-unaware and fairness-aware algorithms. We found that fairness-unaware algorithms typically fail to produce adequately fair models and that the simplest algorithms are not necessarily the fairest ones. We also found that fairness-aware algorithms can induce fairness without material drops in predictive power. Finally, we found that dataset idiosyncracies (e.g., degree of intrinsic unfairness, nature of correlations) do affect the performance of fairness-aware approaches. Our results allow the practitioner to narrow down the approach(es) they would like to adopt without having to know in advance their fairness requirements.
The study of human mobility is crucial due to its impact on several aspects of our society, such as disease spreading, urban planning, well-being, pollution, and more. The proliferation of digital mobility data, such as phone records, GPS traces, and social media posts, combined with the predictive power of artificial intelligence, triggered the application of deep learning to human mobility. Existing surveys focus on single tasks, data sources, mechanistic or traditional machine learning approaches, while a comprehensive description of deep learning solutions is missing. This survey provides a taxonomy of mobility tasks, a discussion on the challenges related to each task and how deep learning may overcome the limitations of traditional models, a description of the most relevant solutions to the mobility tasks described above and the relevant challenges for the future. Our survey is a guide to the leading deep learning solutions to next-location prediction, crowd flow prediction, trajectory generation, and flow generation. At the same time, it helps deep learning scientists and practitioners understand the fundamental concepts and the open challenges of the study of human mobility.
Context: Conducting experiments is central to research machine learning research to benchmark, evaluate and compare learning algorithms. Consequently it is important we conduct reliable, trustworthy experiments. Objective: We investigate the incidence of errors in a sample of machine learning experiments in the domain of software defect prediction. Our focus is simple arithmetical and statistical errors. Method: We analyse 49 papers describing 2456 individual experimental results from a previously undertaken systematic review comparing supervised and unsupervised defect prediction classifiers. We extract the confusion matrices and test for relevant constraints, e.g., the marginal probabilities must sum to one. We also check for multiple statistical significance testing errors. Results: We find that a total of 22 out of 49 papers contain demonstrable errors. Of these 7 were statistical and 16 related to confusion matrix inconsistency (one paper contained both classes of error). Conclusions: Whilst some errors may be of a relatively trivial nature, e.g., transcription errors their presence does not engender confidence. We strongly urge researchers to follow open science principles so errors can be more easily be detected and corrected, thus as a community reduce this worryingly high error rate with our computational experiments.
suggested questions
Log in to be able to interact and post comments
comments
Fetching comments
Sign in to be able to follow your search criteria
