Comparison of agent-based transit assignment procedure with conventional approaches: Toronto, Canada, transit network and microsimulation learning-based approach to transit assignment

Transportation Research Record

Volumn , Issue 2175, 2010, Pages 47-56

  Wang, Joshua ^a   Wahba, Mohamed ^b   Miller, Eric J ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO   (Canada)

^b UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

MASS TRANSPORTATION; MULTIMODAL TRANSPORTATION; PLANNING; RANDOM PROCESSES; STOCHASTIC SYSTEMS;

AGENT BASED; ASSIGNMENT MODELS; CONVENTIONAL APPROACH; LEARNING-BASED APPROACH; MICROSIMULATION; SERVICE PERFORMANCE; TORONTO; TRANSIT ASSIGNMENT; TRANSIT NETWORKS; TRANSIT SYSTEMS;

AGGREGATES;

EID: 78651335966     PISSN: 03611981     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3141/2175-06     Document Type: Article

References (17)

1. Wahba, M., and A. Shalaby. MILATRAS: A New Modelling Framework for the Transit Assignment Problem. In Schedule-Based Modeling of Transportation Networks: Theory and Applications (N. Wilson and A. Nuzzolo, eds.), Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 2009, pp. 171-194.
2. Wahba, M., and A. Shalaby. Learning-Based Departure Time and Path Choice Modelling for Transit Assignment under Information Provision: A Theoretical Framework. Presented at 12th International Conference on Travel Behaviour Research, Jaipur, Rajasthan, India, Dec. 13-18, 2009.
3. Wahba, M. MILATRAS: Microsimulation Learning-Based Approach to Transit Assignment. PhD dissertation. Graduate Department of Civil Engineering, University of Toronto, Ontario, Canada, 2008.
4. MADITUC. Toronto, Ontario, Canada, 2008. http://www.transport.polymtl.ca. Accessed Feb. 20, 2009.
5. Miller, E. J. A Travel Demand Modeling System for the Greater Toronto Area, Version 3.0. Joint Program in Transportation, University of Toronto, Ontario, Canada, 2007.
6. Wahba, M., and A. Shalaby. Transit Assignment Approaches: Past, Present and Future. Working paper. Civil Engineering Department, University of Toronto, Ontario, Canada, 2009.
7. Chriqui, C., and P. Robillard. Common Bus Lines. Transportation Science, Vol. 9, 1975, pp. 115-121.
8. Le Clercq, F. A Public Transport Assignment Method. Traffic Engineering and Control, Vol. 17, No. 1, 1972, pp. 14-20.
9. Spiess, H., and M. Florian. Optimal Strategies: A New Assignment Model for Transit Networks. Centre de recherché sur les transport, Université de Montreal, Quebec, Canada, 1989.
10. EMME/2 User's Manual, Release 9.4. INRO, Montreal, Quebec, Canada, 2003.
11. Chapleau, R. Transit Network Analysis and Evaluation with a Totally Disaggregate Approach. Presented at World Conference on Transportation Research, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada, 1986.
12. Nuzzolo, A., F. Russo, and U. Crisalli. Transit Network Modelling: The Schedule-Based Approach. Collana Trasporti, FrancoAngeli s.r.l., Milan, Italy, 2003.
13. Transportation Tomorrow Survey 2001: Design and Conduct of the Survey. Data Management Group, University of Toronto, Joint Program in Transportation, Ontario, Canada, Jan. 2003.
14. Wahba, M., and A. Shalaby. Large-Scale Application of MILATRAS: Case Study of the Toronto Transit Network. Presented at 12th International Conference on Travel Behaviour Research, Jaipur, Rajasthan, India, Dec. 13-18, 2009.
15. Transportation Tomorrow Survey 2001: Data Validation. Data Management Group, University of Toronto, Joint Program in Transportation, Ontario, Canada, Feb. 2003.
16. Wahba, M., and A. Shalaby. An Agent-Based Microsimulation Model with Experiential Learning for Passenger Assignment under Information Provision. Accepted for presentation at 11th International Conference on Advanced Systems for Public Transport, July 20-22, 2009, Hong Kong (not presented).
17. Lau, J., M. Hatzopoulou, M. Wahba, and E. Miller. An Integrated Multi-Model Evaluation of Transit Bus Emissions in Toronto. Working paper. Civil Engineering Department, University of Toronto, Ontario, Canada, 2009.