Cell Phone Location Data for Travel Behavior Analysis (2018) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
Pages 90-109
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 90... ...
90 8.1 Roadmap to the Chapter Chapter 7 provided the cornerstone for the estimation of origin–destination (O-D) trip matrices using call detail record (CDR)
|
From page 91... ...
Model Comparison: Origin–Destination Trips 91 departure times and the distribution of trip purposes by time of day. The NHTS data were also used as a benchmark for comparisons with CDR estimates.
|
From page 92... ...
92 Cell Phone Location Data for Travel Behavior Analysis • High-occupancy vehicles (HOVs) with two, three, or more persons that were converted to equivalent HOV person-trips, and • Walk-only person-trips.
|
From page 93... ...
Model Comparison: Origin–Destination Trips 93 8.2.2.2 2007 Boston Region MPO Travel Demand Model The research team obtained a published version of the MPO model results for the Boston region (Central Transportation Planning Staff 2008)
|
From page 94... ...
94 Cell Phone Location Data for Travel Behavior Analysis The results of CDR Model 3 also include O-D person-trips for an average weekday and weekend day by purpose and by time of day at the Census tract level. For consistency in the comparisons, weekday estimates were included in this study.
|
From page 95... ...
Model Comparison: Origin–Destination Trips 95 Table 8-1 also provides estimates of individual daily average trips per person in the Boston region. As expected, CDR Models 1 and 2 and the 2007 Boston MPO model had similar results, with averages ranging from 3.2 to 3.5 daily trips per person.
|
From page 96... ...
96 Cell Phone Location Data for Travel Behavior Analysis – CDR Model 2 and the 2010 Boston regional model had the largest HBW shares (27% and 23%, respectively)
|
From page 97... ...
Model Comparison: Origin–Destination Trips 97 • The two outliers are the 2010 Boston MPO model, with the lowest NHB share of 22%, and the 2011 MTS, with the highest NHB share of 39%. Both of these shares fall outside the range of NHB travel observed by planners across different regions and can be considered as outliers.
|
From page 98... ...
98 Cell Phone Location Data for Travel Behavior Analysis sources highlights some new patterns that are specific to differences in time of day and different from trip purposes.
|
From page 99... ...
Model Comparison: Origin–Destination Trips 99 • In summary, CDR Model 1 had the highest share of rest-of-day trips. The CDR Model 3 (vendor-provided data)
|
From page 100... ...
Estimation Source Total (Pearson correlation coefficient) All Pairs CDR Model 1 0.98 CDR Model 2 0.98 CDR Model 3 0.96 Intratown CDR Model 1 0.99 CDR Model 0.99 CDR Model 3 0.98 Intertown CDR Model 1 0.94 CDR Model 2 0.93 CDR Model 3 0.90 Source: 2010 Boston MPO model and CDR Models 1–3.
|
From page 101... ...
Model Comparison: Origin–Destination Trips 101 represents observations in each of the CDR models while the vertical y-axis represents observations from the 2010 Boston MPO model. These three comparisons suggest that CDR Models 1 and 2 had a better correspondence with the MPO model than CDR Model 3 (the vendor product)
|
From page 102... ...
102 Cell Phone Location Data for Travel Behavior Analysis Source: 2010 Boston MPO model and CDR Models 1, 2, and 3. Figure 8-3.
|
From page 103... ...
Model Comparison: Origin–Destination Trips 103 the CDR models, while the vertical y-axis represents observations from the 2010 Boston MPO model. The patterns in these graphs provide a qualitative way to evaluate the degree of match with the 2010 Boston MPO model: • The first row of figures refers to HBW trips and shows that CDR Models 1 and 3 have more observations close to the 45° line and therefore offer a better match with the 2010 Boston MPO model than does CDR Model 2.
|
From page 104... ...
104 Cell Phone Location Data for Travel Behavior Analysis Source: 2010 Boston MPO model and CDR Models 1–3. Figure 8-4.
|
From page 105... ...
Model Comparison: Origin–Destination Trips 105 Pearson Correlation Coefficient by Time of Day Estimation Source A.M. Peak Midday P.M.
|
From page 106... ...
106 Cell Phone Location Data for Travel Behavior Analysis Source: 2010 Boston MPO model and CDR Models 1–3. Figure 8-5.
|
From page 107... ...
Model Comparison: Origin–Destination Trips 107 Source: 2010 Boston MPO model and CDR Models 1–3. Figure 8-6.
|
From page 108... ...
108 Cell Phone Location Data for Travel Behavior Analysis versions of the Boston MPO model. These results were also compared with the guidance in NCHRP Report 716 where applicable (Cambridge Systematics, Inc.
|
From page 109... ...
Model Comparison: Origin–Destination Trips 109 The value of these comparisons lies in their transparency, in that they can serve as a benchmark for practitioners assessing the value of CDR data for different purposes. Additional comparisons such as trip-length distributions and screenline comparisons can be carried out to provide more insight into the value of CDR data.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.