Comparing a Household Activity-Based Model with a Person Activity-Based Model

14th TRB Conference on Transportation Planning ApplicationsMay 5-9, 2013, Columbus, Ohio

John L Bowman, Mark Bradley, Joe Castiglione, Suzanne Childress, John Gibb, Chris Johnson,

Matthew Kitchen, John Long, Maren Outwater

Context

• AB model implementation project at PSRC

• DaySim software platform• Implementing two versions

• Classic DaySim version simulates separate person days

• New version simulates coordinated household days with joint travel

TRB Planning Apps Conf May 2013 Bowman, et al 2

Survey Percent of Tours by Joint Type

TRB Planning Apps Conf May 2013 Bowman, et al 3

65.7%19.4%

14.9%Non-Joint Tour

On Joint Non-Mandatory Tour

With JointMandatory Travel

Survey Percent of Tours with Joint Travel for each Purpose

TRB Planning Apps Conf May 2013 Bowman, et al 4

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

Research Objective

• Compare the household version with the person version• Design (Common aspects, differences)• Operation (run time, simulated

outcomes, sensitivity tests)

TRB Planning Apps Conf May 2013 Bowman, et al 5

Presentation Objective

• Compare the household version with the person version• Design (Common aspects, differences)• Operation (run time, simulated

outcomes, sensitivity tests)

• Describe the household version models in more detail

TRB Planning Apps Conf May 2013 Bowman, et al 6

Presentation Objective

• Compare the household version with the person version• Design (Common aspects,

differences)• Operation (run time, simulated

outcomes, sensitivity tests)

• Describe the household version models in more detail

TRB Planning Apps Conf May 2013 Bowman, et al 7

TRB Planning Apps Conf May 2013 Bowman, et al 8

ABTravel Demand

Simulator

Network assignment

Trips(OD matrices)

Traffic conditions

Predictions

Zones/Parcels, Networks,Households & Individuals

Core functionalityvia shared code base

• Run control and distributed processing• I/O and data structures (households,

travel, spatial, skims)• Choice probability calculations and

simulation• Generation of control and data files for

model estimation• Time window accounting, shadow pricing

and destination sampling

TRB Planning Apps Conf May 2013 Bowman, et al 9

Integrated System of Choice Models

Activity-Based Models: 1993-2012 John L Bowman, Ph.D. (www.JBowman.net) 10

Long term

Day

Tour

Trip/Stop

Downward integration

Upward integration

Presentation Objective

• Compare the household version with the person version• Design (Common aspects, differences)• Operation (run time, simulated

outcomes, sensitivity tests)

• Describe the household version models in more detail

TRB Planning Apps Conf May 2013 Bowman, et al 11

TRB Planning Apps Conf May 2013 Bowman, et al 12

Run Controller

PersonChoiceModelRunner Choice models (person version)

Choice models (household

version)HouseholdChoiceModelRunner

DaySim Software Package

TRB Planning Apps Conf May 2013 Bowman, et al 13

Run Controller

Configuration FileChoiceModelRunner=”HouseholdChoiceModelRunner”

PersonChoiceModelRunner Choice models (person version)

Choice models (household

version)HouseholdChoiceModelRunner

ChoiceModelRunnerWithin-Day Components

TRB Planning Apps Conf May 2013 Bowman, et al 14

Day Level Models(Identify tours and stop purposes)

Tour & Trip Models(Details of each tour)

Day Level ModelsPerson Household

Person Day Activity Pattern

Household Day Pattern Type

Person Mandatory Activities

Joint Mandatory Half Tours

Joint Non-Mandatory Tours

Person Day Activity Pattern

TRB Planning Apps Conf May 2013 Bowman, et al 15

Tour and Trip ModelsPerson Household

Models--Tour destination, mode, timing--Iterative within half tour: --stop generation & purpose --location, mode, timing

Simulation sequence--by purpose priority

Models--Tour destination, mode, timing--Iterative within half tour: --stop generation & purpose --location, mode, timing

Simulation sequence1. Partially joint half tours2. Fully joint half tours3. Person mandatory tours4. Joint non-mandatory tours5. Person non-mandatory tours

TRB Planning Apps Conf May 2013 Bowman, et al 16

Household version tour & trip models conditioned by…

• Type of tour(joint half tour, joint tour, etc)

• Information about participants on tour

• Joint time windows for joint travel• Person’s known participation in joint

travel (for individual tours)

TRB Planning Apps Conf May 2013 Bowman, et al 17

Presentation Objective

• Compare the household version with the person version• Design (Common aspects, differences)• Operation (run time, simulated

outcomes, sensitivity tests)

• Describe the household version models in more detail

TRB Planning Apps Conf May 2013 Bowman, et al 18

Household Day Pattern Type (Vovsha & Bradley)

• Up to three alternative pattern type alternatives per person• Mandatory on tour• Non-mandatory on tour• At home all day

• Modeled…• jointly for up to five persons in household• Individually for additional persons

TRB Planning Apps Conf May 2013 Bowman, et al 19

Modeling Person Mandatory Activities

TRB Planning Apps Conf May 2013 Bowman, et al 20

Tour Generation

Work at home?

(binary choice)

No more mandatory tours

Usual work tour, orOther work tour, or

School tour

Mandatory Stop Presence (work,

school or both)

Joint Mandatory Half Tours• Partially joint

• To work or school locations • From• Paired (both ways)

• Fully joint• To work or school location • From• Paired (both ways)

TRB Planning Apps Conf May 2013 Bowman, et al 21

Partially Joint Half Tour(To Work and/or School)

TRB Planning Apps Conf May 2013 Bowman, et al 22

Leavehome

Drop off Drop off

Arrive

Partially Joint Half Tour(From Work and/or School)

TRB Planning Apps Conf May 2013 Bowman, et al 23

Arrivehome

Pick up Pick up

Depart

Partially Joint Half Tour(Paired To and From)

TRB Planning Apps Conf May 2013 Bowman, et al 24

Arrivehome

Pick up Pick up

Depart

Leavehome

Drop off Drop off

Arrive

Fully Joint Half Tour(To Work or School)

TRB Planning Apps Conf May 2013 Bowman, et al 25

Leavehome

Arrive

Fully Joint Half Tour(From Work or School)

TRB Planning Apps Conf May 2013 Bowman, et al 26

Arrivehome

Depart

Fully Joint Half Tour(Paired To and From)

TRB Planning Apps Conf May 2013 Bowman, et al 27

Arrivehome

Depart

Leavehome

Arrive

Fully Joint Half Tour(Chauffeured To Work or School)

TRB Planning Apps Conf May 2013 Bowman, et al 28

1. Leave home

2. Arrive

3. Non-working chauffeur return home

Fully Joint Half Tour(Chauffeured From Work or School)

TRB Planning Apps Conf May 2013 Bowman, et al 29

3. Arrive home2. Depart

1. Non-working chauffeur depart for pickup

Fully Joint Half Tour(Paired with Chauffeur)

TRB Planning Apps Conf May 2013 Bowman, et al 30

6. Arrive home5. Depart

1. Leave home

2. Arrive

3. Non-working chauffeur return home

4. Non-working chauffeur depart for pickup

Survey Joint Travel on School Tours

TRB Planning Apps Conf May 2013 Bowman, et al 31

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

Indi-vidual

Full FirstHalf

FullSecond

Half

Full BothHalves

PartialFirst Half

PartialSecond

Half

PartialBoth

Halves

Mix ofFull andPartial

Survey Joint Travel on Work Tours

TRB Planning Apps Conf May 2013 Bowman, et al 32

0.0%

0.5%

1.0%

1.5%

2.0%

2.5%

3.0%

3.5%

Full FirstHalf

FullSecond

Half

Full BothHalves

PartialFirst Half

PartialSecond

Half

PartialBoth

Halves

Mix ofFull andPartial

Survey Tours with Joint Half Tour Travel by Type and Household Size

TRB Planning Apps Conf May 2013 Bowman, et al 33

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

2 3 4 5 6+

Full HalfTours

Partial HalfTours

Household Size

Num

ber p

er H

H

Modeling Joint Half Tours

TRB Planning Apps Conf May 2013 Bowman, et al 34

Half Tour Generation

Fully Joint Half Tour

Participation

Partially Joint Half Tour

Participation

To From Paired To From Paired

Stop

Update availability

Modeling Joint Non-Mandatory Tours

TRB Planning Apps Conf May 2013 Bowman, et al 35

Tour Generation No more

mandatory tours

Tour for one of seven purposes

Tour Participation

(jointly for up to 5 persons)

Household Version Development Process and Status

TRB Planning Apps Conf May 2013 Bowman, et al 36

Develop ChoiceModelRunner logic--estimation mode--application mode

Specify and estimate choice models

Test ChoiceModelRunner logic

Tune performance of ChoiceModelRunnerRe-estimate models

Test sensitivity Replace Person Version in Travel

Model System

Day-Level Model Coefficients

Model CategoryNumber of Coefficients

Number of Logsum

Coefficients

Household Day Pattern Type 231 25

Mandatory Activities 67 5

Joint Mandatory Half Tours 120 8

Joint Non-Mandatory Tours 126 5

Person Day Activity Pattern 424 22

Total for Day-Level Models 968 65

TRB Planning Apps Conf May 2013 Bowman, et al 37

TRB Planning Apps Conf May 2013 Bowman, et al 38

Flexible DaySim Features accessed via configuration file

• Distributed processing• Estimation vs application mode• Spatial scale (zones, microzones,

parcels)• Skim roster (modes, submodes, time

periods, variables, VOT)• Customized data structures (via

inheritance)

TRB Planning Apps Conf May 2013 Bowman, et al 39

Flexible DaySim Features accessed via configuration file (cont’d)

• Short distance calculation method• Shadow pricing• VOT categories• Units (length, distance, monetary)• Choice model runner• Choice model components• Coefficient files

TRB Planning Apps Conf May 2013 Bowman, et al 40