Effects of Coverage Area Treatment, Spatial Analysis Unit, and Regression Model on the Results of Station-Level Demand Modeling of Urban Rail Transit

Direct ridership models can predict station-level urban rail transit ridership. Previous research indicates that the direct modeling of urban rail transit ridership uses different coverage overlapping area processing methods (such as naive method or Thiessen polygons), area analysis units (such as c...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Hongtai Yang, Chaojing Li, Xuan Li, Jinghai Huo, Yi Wen, Emma G. P. Sexton, Yugang Liu
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Wiley 2021-01-01
Series:Journal of Advanced Transportation
Online Access:http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2021/7345807
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1850215711707758592
author Hongtai Yang
Chaojing Li
Xuan Li
Jinghai Huo
Yi Wen
Emma G. P. Sexton
Yugang Liu
author_facet Hongtai Yang
Chaojing Li
Xuan Li
Jinghai Huo
Yi Wen
Emma G. P. Sexton
Yugang Liu
author_sort Hongtai Yang
collection DOAJ
description Direct ridership models can predict station-level urban rail transit ridership. Previous research indicates that the direct modeling of urban rail transit ridership uses different coverage overlapping area processing methods (such as naive method or Thiessen polygons), area analysis units (such as census block group and census tract), and various regression models (such as linear regression and negative binomial regression). However, the selection of these methods and models seems arbitrary. The objective of this research is to suggest methods of station-level urban rail transit ridership model selection and evaluate the impact of this selection on ridership model results and prediction accuracy. Urban rail transit ridership data in 2010 were collected from five cities: New York, San Francisco, Chicago, Philadelphia, and Boston. Using the built environment characteristics as the independent variables and station-level ridership as the dependent variable, an analysis was conducted to examine the differences in the model performance in ridership prediction. Our results show that a large overlap of circular coverage areas will greatly affect the accuracy of models. The equal division method increases model accuracy significantly. Most models show that the generalized additive models have lower mean absolute percentage errors (MAPE) and higher adjusted R2 values. By comparison, the Akaike information criterion (AIC) values of the negative binomial models are lower. The influence of different basic spatial analysis unit on the model results is marginal. Therefore, the selection of basic area unit can use existing data. In terms of model selection, advanced models seem to perform better than the linear regression models.
format Article
id doaj-art-873146f661b44cd89f50a8015bb8a5f0
institution OA Journals
issn 0197-6729
2042-3195
language English
publishDate 2021-01-01
publisher Wiley
record_format Article
series Journal of Advanced Transportation
spelling doaj-art-873146f661b44cd89f50a8015bb8a5f02025-08-20T02:08:31ZengWileyJournal of Advanced Transportation0197-67292042-31952021-01-01202110.1155/2021/73458077345807Effects of Coverage Area Treatment, Spatial Analysis Unit, and Regression Model on the Results of Station-Level Demand Modeling of Urban Rail TransitHongtai Yang0Chaojing Li1Xuan Li2Jinghai Huo3Yi Wen4Emma G. P. Sexton5Yugang Liu6School of Transportation and Logistics, National Engineering Laboratory of Integrated Transportation Big Data Application Technology, National United Engineering Laboratory of Integrated and Intelligent Transportation, Institute of System Science and Engineering, Southwest Jiaotong University, Chengdu 610000, ChinaSchool of Transportation and Logistics, National Engineering Laboratory of Integrated Transportation Big Data Application Technology, National United Engineering Laboratory of Integrated and Intelligent Transportation, Institute of System Science and Engineering, Southwest Jiaotong University, Chengdu 610000, ChinaSchool of Transportation and Logistics, National Engineering Laboratory of Integrated Transportation Big Data Application Technology, National United Engineering Laboratory of Integrated and Intelligent Transportation, Institute of System Science and Engineering, Southwest Jiaotong University, Chengdu 610000, ChinaSchool of Transportation and Logistics, National Engineering Laboratory of Integrated Transportation Big Data Application Technology, National United Engineering Laboratory of Integrated and Intelligent Transportation, Institute of System Science and Engineering, Southwest Jiaotong University, Chengdu 610000, ChinaDepartment of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of TN, Knoxville, Knoxville, TN 37996, USADepartment of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of TN, Knoxville, Knoxville, TN 37996, USASchool of Transportation and Logistics, National Engineering Laboratory of Integrated Transportation Big Data Application Technology, National United Engineering Laboratory of Integrated and Intelligent Transportation, Institute of System Science and Engineering, Southwest Jiaotong University, Chengdu 610000, ChinaDirect ridership models can predict station-level urban rail transit ridership. Previous research indicates that the direct modeling of urban rail transit ridership uses different coverage overlapping area processing methods (such as naive method or Thiessen polygons), area analysis units (such as census block group and census tract), and various regression models (such as linear regression and negative binomial regression). However, the selection of these methods and models seems arbitrary. The objective of this research is to suggest methods of station-level urban rail transit ridership model selection and evaluate the impact of this selection on ridership model results and prediction accuracy. Urban rail transit ridership data in 2010 were collected from five cities: New York, San Francisco, Chicago, Philadelphia, and Boston. Using the built environment characteristics as the independent variables and station-level ridership as the dependent variable, an analysis was conducted to examine the differences in the model performance in ridership prediction. Our results show that a large overlap of circular coverage areas will greatly affect the accuracy of models. The equal division method increases model accuracy significantly. Most models show that the generalized additive models have lower mean absolute percentage errors (MAPE) and higher adjusted R2 values. By comparison, the Akaike information criterion (AIC) values of the negative binomial models are lower. The influence of different basic spatial analysis unit on the model results is marginal. Therefore, the selection of basic area unit can use existing data. In terms of model selection, advanced models seem to perform better than the linear regression models.http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2021/7345807
spellingShingle Hongtai Yang
Chaojing Li
Xuan Li
Jinghai Huo
Yi Wen
Emma G. P. Sexton
Yugang Liu
Effects of Coverage Area Treatment, Spatial Analysis Unit, and Regression Model on the Results of Station-Level Demand Modeling of Urban Rail Transit
Journal of Advanced Transportation
title Effects of Coverage Area Treatment, Spatial Analysis Unit, and Regression Model on the Results of Station-Level Demand Modeling of Urban Rail Transit
title_full Effects of Coverage Area Treatment, Spatial Analysis Unit, and Regression Model on the Results of Station-Level Demand Modeling of Urban Rail Transit
title_fullStr Effects of Coverage Area Treatment, Spatial Analysis Unit, and Regression Model on the Results of Station-Level Demand Modeling of Urban Rail Transit
title_full_unstemmed Effects of Coverage Area Treatment, Spatial Analysis Unit, and Regression Model on the Results of Station-Level Demand Modeling of Urban Rail Transit
title_short Effects of Coverage Area Treatment, Spatial Analysis Unit, and Regression Model on the Results of Station-Level Demand Modeling of Urban Rail Transit
title_sort effects of coverage area treatment spatial analysis unit and regression model on the results of station level demand modeling of urban rail transit
url http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2021/7345807
work_keys_str_mv AT hongtaiyang effectsofcoverageareatreatmentspatialanalysisunitandregressionmodelontheresultsofstationleveldemandmodelingofurbanrailtransit
AT chaojingli effectsofcoverageareatreatmentspatialanalysisunitandregressionmodelontheresultsofstationleveldemandmodelingofurbanrailtransit
AT xuanli effectsofcoverageareatreatmentspatialanalysisunitandregressionmodelontheresultsofstationleveldemandmodelingofurbanrailtransit
AT jinghaihuo effectsofcoverageareatreatmentspatialanalysisunitandregressionmodelontheresultsofstationleveldemandmodelingofurbanrailtransit
AT yiwen effectsofcoverageareatreatmentspatialanalysisunitandregressionmodelontheresultsofstationleveldemandmodelingofurbanrailtransit
AT emmagpsexton effectsofcoverageareatreatmentspatialanalysisunitandregressionmodelontheresultsofstationleveldemandmodelingofurbanrailtransit
AT yugangliu effectsofcoverageareatreatmentspatialanalysisunitandregressionmodelontheresultsofstationleveldemandmodelingofurbanrailtransit