有偏好的交通网络路径选择模型

陈京荣; 徐瑞华

doi:10.19818/j.cnki.1671-1637.2012.02.014

有偏好的交通网络路径选择模型

doi: 10.19818/j.cnki.1671-1637.2012.02.014

陈京荣^{1, 2,},
徐瑞华¹

1.
同济大学交通运输工程学院, 上海 201804
2.
兰州交通大学数理与软件工程学院, 甘肃兰州 730070

基金项目:

国家自然科学基金项目 61164003

国家自然科学基金项目 60870006

甘肃省教育厅科研项目 1004-01

详细信息

作者简介:
陈京荣(1975-), 女, 甘肃榆中人, 兰州交通大学副教授, 同济大学博士后, 从事网络优化理论与算法研究

中图分类号: U116.2
计量
- 文章访问数: 646
- HTML全文浏览量: 109
- PDF下载量: 890
- 被引次数: 0
出版历程
- 收稿日期: 2011-12-13
- 刊出日期: 2012-04-25

Route choice model with preferences in traffic network

CHEN Jing-rong^{1, 2
,},
XU Rui-hua¹

1.
School of Transportation Engineering, Tongji University, Shanghai 201804, China
2.
School of Mathematics, Physics and Software Engineering, Lanzhou Jiaotong University, Lanzhou 730070, Gansu, China

More Information

Author Bio:
CHEN Jing-rong(1975-), female, associate professor, PhD, +86-931-4938625, chenjr@mail.lzjtu.cn

摘要

摘要: 在城市交通网络中, 已知路径的时间属性与费用属性, 分析了出行者对路径有、无主观偏好时的路径选择问题。当无偏好时, 利用信息熵理论和多属性综合决策方法给出了获得路径综合属性值的计算模型; 当有偏好时, 对不同的路径通过互反判断矩阵给出主观偏好, 然后利用互反判断矩阵之间的偏差建立关于属性权重向量的优化模型, 并采用解析的方法对模型进行求解, 得到每个属性的权重, 从而进一步计算出每条路径的综合属性值, 属性值最大的路径为最优路径。分析结果表明: 在无偏好时最佳选择路径2的综合属性值为0.918;在有偏好时最佳选择路径4的综合属性值为0.965, 与无偏好的相差较大, 且6条路径的选择次序不同。可见, 出行者的主观偏好对路径选择结果有较大的影响。
- 交通网络 /
- 路径选择 /
- 优化模型 /
- 路径偏好 /
- 信息熵 /
- 互反判断矩阵
Abstract: In urban traffic network, when the attributes of times and costs for paths were confirmed, the path selection problems with the preferences of travelers or not were analyzed.When there were no preferences, the integrated attribute value of each path was obtained by using the information entropy theory and the multi-attribute synthetic decision method.When the preferences for different paths were given by using the reciprocal judgment matrixes, for obtaining the weight of each attribute, an optimal model of weight vectors was set up to minimize the deviations between the reciprocal judgment matrixes.The model was solved by the analytic method, the attribute weights were used to calculate the integrated values of the paths, and the path with the maximum was the optimal.Analysis result shows that for the no preference problem, path 2 is the optimal with the integrated value 0.918.Otherwise, for the preference problem, path 4 is the optimal with the integrated value 0.965.Under the two conditions, the orders of six chosen paths are different.So, the preferences of travelers have obvious effect on route choice.
- traffic network /
- route choice /
- optimal model /
- path preference /
- information entropy /
- reciprocal judgment matrix

HTML全文

图 1 交通网络

Figure 1. Traffic network

下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片

表 1 四种互反标度

Table 1. Four kinds of reciprocal scales

1~9标度	指数标度	10/10~18/2标度	9/9~9/1标度	含义
1	a⁰	10/10	9/9	路径x_i与路径x_s同样重要
3	a²	12/8	9/7	路径x_i稍微重要于路径x_s
5	a⁴	14/6	9/5	路径x_i明显重要于路径x_s
7	a⁶	16/4	9/3	路径x_i强烈重要于路径x_s
9	a⁸	18/2	9/1	路径x_i极端重要于路径x_s

下载: 导出CSV

表 2 起讫点对(2, 24)间的路径

Table 2. Paths of origin-destination site (2, 24)

路径	路径走向	时间	费用
1	2→8→14→16→20→18→21→24	28	34
2	2→6→11→16→20→18→21→24	29	31
3	2→6→7→10→15→17→24	31	34
4	2→6→7→13→18→21→24	37	27
5	2→6→7→10→12→17→24	32	30
6	2→8→11→16→20→18→21→24	30	31

下载: 导出CSV

表 3 路径综合属性值

Table 3. Integrated attribute values of paths

算法	路径1	路径2	路径3	路径4	路径5	路径6
无偏好算法	0.897	0.918	0.849	0.878	0.887	0.902
有偏好算法	0.576	0.770	0.679	0.965	0.927	0.805

下载: 导出CSV

参考文献(13)

[1]	LAM W H K, LI Zhi-chun, HUANG Hai-jun, et al. Modeling time-dependent travel choice problems in road networks with multiple user classes and multiple parking facilities[J]. Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, 2006, 40(5): 368-395. doi: 10.1016/j.trb.2005.05.003
[2]	GAO Song, CHABINI I. Optimal routing policy problems in stochastic time-dependent networks[J]. Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, 2006, 40(2): 93-122. doi: 10.1016/j.trb.2005.02.001
[3]	OPASANON S, MILLER-HOOKS E. Multicriteria adaptive paths in stochastic, time-varying networks[J]. European Journal of Operational Research, 2006, 173(1): 72-91. doi: 10.1016/j.ejor.2004.12.003
[4]	CHANG T S, NOZICK L K, TURNQUIST M A. Multi-objective path finding in stochastic dynamic networks, with application to routing hazardous materials shipments[J]. Transportation Science, 2005, 39(3): 383-399. doi: 10.1287/trsc.1040.0094
[5]	李振龙. 诱导条件下驾驶员路径选择行为的演化博弈分析[J]. 交通运输系统工程与信息, 2003, 3(2): 23-27. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-YSXT200302005.htm LI Zhen-long. A study of route choice behavior of drivers based on the evolutionary game under the condition of traffic flow guidance[J]. Journal of Transportation Systems Engineering and Information Technology, 2003, 3(2): 23-27. (in Chinese). https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-YSXT200302005.htm
[6]	王媛, 杨兆升, 管青, 等. 自适应路径规划系统研究[J]. 公路交通科技, 2009, 26(5): 117-122. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-GLJK200905024.htm WANG Yuan, YANG Zhao-sheng, GUAN Qing, et al. Study on adaptive route planning system[J]. Journal of Highway and Transportation Research and Development, 2009, 26(5): 117-122. (in Chinese). https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-GLJK200905024.htm
[7]	于德新, 杨薇, 杨兆升. 重大灾害条件下基于GIS的最短路径改进算法[J]. 交通运输工程学报, 2011, 11(4): 123-126. http://transport.chd.edu.cn/article/id/201104019 YU De-xin, YANG Wei, YANG Zhao-sheng. Shortest path improved algorithm based on GIS under large-scale disaster[J]. Journal of Traffic and Transportation Engineering, 2011, 11(4): 123-126. (in Chinese). http://transport.chd.edu.cn/article/id/201104019
[8]	陈京荣. 交通网络路径选择及应用研究[D]. 兰州: 兰州交通大学, 2009. CHEN Jing-rong. Research on route choice and its application in traffic networks[D]. Lanzhou: Lanzhou Jiaotong University, 2009. (in Chinese).
[9]	陈京荣, 俞建宁, 李引珍. 随机时间依赖交通网络自适应路径选择[J]. 西南交通大学学报, 2009, 44(4): 523-529. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.0258-2724.2009.04.009 CHEN Jing-rong, YU Jian-ning, LI Yin-zhen. Adaptive path selection in stochastic and time-dependent traffic networks[J]. Journal of Southwest Jiaotong University, 2009, 44(4): 523-529. (in Chinese). doi: 10.3969/j.issn.0258-2724.2009.04.009
[10]	陈京荣, 俞建宁, 李引珍. 基于蚁群算法的多属性路径选择模型[J]. 系统工程, 2009, 27(5): 30-34. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-GCXT200905007.htm CHEN Jing-rong, YU Jian-ning, LI Yin-zhen. Model of choosing routes with multi-attributes based on ant colony algorithm[J]. Systems Engineering, 2009, 27(5): 30-34. (in Chinese). https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-GCXT200905007.htm
[11]	张文泉, 张世英, 江立勤. 基于熵的决策评价模型及应用[J]. 系统工程学报, 1995, 10(3): 69-74. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-XTGC503.009.htm ZHANG Wen-quan, ZHANG Shi-ying, JIANG Li-qin. A deci-sion assessment model based on entropy and its application[J]. Journal of Systems Engineering, 1995, 10(3): 69-74. (in Chinese). https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-XTGC503.009.htm
[12]	徐泽水. AHP中两类标度的关系研究[J]. 系统工程理论与实践, 1999, 19(7): 97-101. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-XTLL907.016.htm XU Ze-shui. Study on the relation between two classes of scales in AHP[J]. Systems Engineering—Theory and Prac-tice, 1999, 19(7): 97-101. (in Chinese). https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-XTLL907.016.htm
[13]	XU Ze-shui, WEI Cui-ping. A new method for priorities in the analytic hierarchy process[J]. Operations Research Transactions, 2000, 4(3): 47-54.