Cube Analyst 2.0: An Introduction to the Next Generation of Matrix Estimation Software

Gabriella Sala

Test cases

• Different models with different issues:• LTS model: long run times • ESTONIAN model: lack of memory• LISBON model: optimization process

• Comparison between ANALYST1 and ANALYST 2

LTS model

• Owner: • TFL

www.tfl.gov.uk

• Network:• Links: 103.881• Screenlines: 150(816 traffic counts)

• Demand:• MP• Zones: 3837 • Five vehicle

classes

Results

• Run times:• Analyst 1: about 4 days• Analyst 2: about 7 minutes

• Comparisons:

CarB R2

Perc. Screenlines with GEH <= 5 GEH total

Perc. Diff. total

Prior 0.948 56% 1.1 0%

Analyst1 0.956 51% 71.4 13%

Analyst2 0.974 66% 5.4 -1%

Volume over screenline

R2 = 0.9489R2 = 0.9741

R2 = 0.9564

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

8000

9000

10000

0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000

Screenline volumes

Mod

eled

vol

umes

Prior Analyst 1 Analyst 2 Linear (Prior) Linear (Analyst 2) Linear (Analyst 1)

TLD

0

50000

100000

150000

200000

250000

300000

350000

400000

450000

500000

20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200

Distance (Km)

CarB

Prior Estimated Analyst 1 Estimated Analyst 2

Estonian Roads Model

• Owner: • Technical

Center of Estonian Roads Ltdwww.teed.ee

• Network:• Links: 27149• Screenlines: 953

• Demand.• Daily traffic• Two zoning

systems:• Coarse Zones:

227• Fine Zones: 4681

• Three vehicle classes

Limits using Analyst 1

• With finest zoning system Analyst 1 failed to produce results due to a lack of memory requested for the process

• Solution applied: • Divided the entire area into 15 regions• Estimate 15 matrices at fine zoning system• Estimate 1 matrix with a coarse zoning system• Built a process to merge together the 15 subarea

matrices into a unique country matrix using constrains from coarse zoning system.

Limits using Analyst 1

With Analyst 1:

• Run 16 scenarios;

• A total run time of over 15 hours

With Analyst 2:•Only one assignment (40 minutes) •The estimation run has taken 3 minutes.

Lisbon model

• Owner: VTM –

Consultores de Engenharia

www.vtm.pt

• Network:• Links: 5171• Screenlines:

83

• Demand.• Morning peak• Zones: 208• Two vehicle

classes

Results

• Run times• Analyst 1: 43 sec• Analyst 2: 1 sec

• Comparisons

Light vehicles R2

Perc. Screenlines with GEH <= 5 GEH totals Perc. Diff. totals

RMSE[%]

Prior 0.2992 4% 10.29 1% 99%

Analyst1 0.9994 76% 0.78 0% 3%

Analyst2 0.9995 81% 4.00 0% 3%

Heavy vehicles R2

Per. Screenlines with GEH <= 5 GEH totals Perc. Diff. totals

RMSE[%]

Prior 0.0967 22% 72.44 26% 106%

Analyst1 0.9920 88% 1.76 1% 10%

Analyst2 0.9932 86% 4.48 2% 9%

Conclusions

• Faster run times;

• Simpler model structure;

• Better results with sparse matrices;

• No memory limits.